We know MLS salaries...Do we know any YA salaries

You're lucky to draw a salary in the 2nd tier Scandinavian ball. It's more like a stipend.

3rd division in England (League One) pays ~ $150K, which is higher than MLS in nominal terms but without the high outliers.

 

Cost of living in Scandinavia is also horribly higher. Not too sure about England, probably depends on living situation/location (as usual).

 

Whitebred was quoted as saying established EPL Reserve ballers paid around 300-400k us (?? - I'm going from memory here but I think that is right) per year. Reyna was "on" 25k lbs per week I'm remembering. Netherlands foreigner minimum for overage non-EU is over 400k Euro bucks. For "jong" ferners it is around 200k Euros.

Those are some general numbers I recall off hand. Sanneh was getting almost 1 million a year at Nurnberg at the end (Euro bucks, I think). Davies was reported at 150 k on top of a 400 k signing bonus (that would have been a transfer fee had he not been a college kid.)

So you have:
Starting salary top prospect Sweden: 150k on top of bonus. (Davies)
Starting salary: "Jong" non-EU in Ered: 200k + (Lee, Bradley?)
Starting salalry: "Adult swim" non-EU in Ered: 400K + (JOB)
"established" reserve player EPL: 400k (Whitbred, Spector, Simek)
USMNT starting back/team vet. Mid-low level Bund: 1 million Euro (Sanneh)
Lousy USMNT player responsible for all that is wrong with American soccer - EPL: 1 million + sterling (U no who)

I'm sure someone will correct, but I think those are ball park.

 

Now subtract high European income tax rates.

 

Unless you play in California ... (I don't know if any Euro provinces have 11 % surcharges on worldwide income. Certainly the communist republic of Canada doesn't even have that. Taxes in LA, for instance, if you combine the top US rate, the top CA state rate and the 8.25% LA sales tax are easily as onerous as Canadian taxes - even considers a 15% pst/gst and you don't even get back socialized health care and Canada only taxes Canadian sourced income ... but I digress. If Washington State, Alaska or Vermont ever get a franchise, you're sitting pretty!)

 

I think if youre getting paid ANYTHING to play soccer, you're sittin pretty.

 

An average Prem salary is ~ $1.3M/Y.

An average Bundesliga salary is ~ $850K/Y.

An average Colaship salary is $350K/Y.

An average League One is $150K.

I doubt Simek is at a Colaship average. SheffWed is heavily indebted and Frankie was an unproved commodity at that point. So I assume he's at about half of that. Eddie Lewis is at $650K.

Eredivisie minimum non-EU salary is $481K this year. Bradley, Rogers and Nguyen are presumably just above it, at about $500K. Casey will be if he gets picked up.

'Dolo and Keller are probably in the $1.5M-$1.7M range. So was Reyna. McBride is a little above that at $2M. Big Brad must be even higher at $2.5M and TimHo gets his ManU pay of $3.6M.

Boca and Spector are in the $700K neighborhood. Clint should be around $1.2 to $1.5M, a few hundred grand above Gooch.

Yanks in Norway are in the $80K-$150K vicinity. Davies is seemingly in the $175K.

 

When did Donovan move to england?

 

http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.html

I think you meant New Hampshire as Vermonts tax rate is comparable to California.
Other states without state income taxes include: Texas, Florida, Nevada, Wyoming and South Dakota and Tennessee (note some of these tax dividends and interest)

 

Indeed I did mean New Hampshire. I suppose my grandmother living there should have somehow pinned it in the vast moth eaten carpet of my grey matter, but there you have it. Pennsylvania, also, for some odd reason, is fairly reasonable, although Philly city tax doesn't help if you're waiting for that franchise. (I never really understood the Hockey players to Cherry Hill thing - why not just move to Ardmore?

But it is kind of funny how everyone assumes certain things about taxes, and how weird they can really be. Like you can live in England as long as you aren't domiciled and not pay taxes - hence the Russian kajillionaires circling harrods like mice to stilton. but we digress. The obvious truth is, in most cases you are going to make more gross coin in Europe for the same level play, if that's what primes your pump.

 

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx...id=3&lid=2&title=Clubs+set+for+bumper+pay-day

This almost deserves an own thread (not sure if posted anywhere yet) but I guess it's most a propos here:

It looks like Clint's getting there just in time.

 

Why? There's no guarantee that any of that finds its way into the players' pockets. In fact, there would be reason to believe it will simply give Fulham the money to go out and buy better players that would compete with Clint for playing time.

 

Ya, there is.

It's like working for Goldman Sachs in 2006.

 

What? Year end bonuses are the standard in the financial industry. Do football clubs typically give out non-game related bonuses to their players? I don't think so. Most bonuses are based on agreements as part of the player's contract.

 

Do British players have a union, and has there ever been a walk-out or threatened walkout?

 

Yes, there is a union, but I'm not aware of any strike threat.

 

A Prem teams spends 55-65% of its total revenues on salaries.

With ~ $1.8B to share among its 20 club members, this means almost $90M in just TV money (though distributed in two ways - for the performance and the TV appearances) for an average club.

Add paid attendance and sponsorship and that same average club will generate $120M on the low end, $150M on the high end.

This will take an average EPL wage from ~ $1.3M to close to $3M per player.

As to money not going down to the players, it would set a precedent since money has always gone to players in pretty much every league in every nation in every sport.

 

That goes against pretty much every law of labor economics that I know. The market for football players in Europe is relatively open. There is no reason for EPL clubs to pay their players more than they do in Spain or Italy for the players have no option. Salaries increase because of competition for labor, not because profits go higher.

And you've now shifted your argument from the clubs giving the players' bonuses (the Goldman Sachs example) to the profits trickling down to salaries. In your latest explanation it still wouldn't effect Dempsey as he signed a contract with Fulham for a term of at least 2 years...possibly more. When his contract is up he will renegotiate and the salary will be determined by his value on the market, not by Fulham's profit margins. Your first argument was more likely, although I still don't know of teams giving out profit sharing bonuses to players.

 

Have you not been following salaries in the NFL, NBA, MLB?

Huh?

I am not talking about profits, but the revenues.

Goldman Sachs bonuses reflect the revenues generated by the company in 2006. The Prem wages will reflect the revenues generated by the Prem clubs.

What's so hard to understand here?

Back in the early 80s, Lynn Dickey of the Green Bay Packers was the highest paid QB/player in the league, making $400K/Y.

This past season, Brett Favre made $11M, ~ 2750% increase.

What, besides the total revenues brought in by the NFL, has changed? (and yes, I realize there was no free agency in the early 80's but the Packers were a non-for-profit organization then as they are now)

And there a plethora of examples on this in every sport.

Heck, an average Prem player was making $150K a year when the Premiership was formed. Now that average player is making eight times more.

Huh?

Most teams aren't owned to generate profits. In fact, most leagues on average lose money because the wealthy owners subsidize their teams.

And let's not get into Goldman Sachs' labor cost structure or the difference between the cash bonuses,the guaranteed salaries and the stock options.

 

In numbers there is strength. If the EPL players can read (the papers) and understand the numbers involved, they will want a bigger piece of the action.*

**********

IIRC Robbie Rogers signed a 3-year $400k/year contract, sufficient to persuade him that a year of college (and an NCAA championship) had been sufficient.

----------

* I'm not saying that they'll necessarily get a bigger slice.

"This, then, is our answer. We have no words to waste on you. When you reach out your vaunted strong hands for our palaces and purpled ease, we will show you what strength is. In roar of shell and shrapnel and in whine of machine-guns will our answer be couched.* We will grind you revolutionists down under our heel, and we shall walk upon your faces. The world is ours, we are its lords, and ours it shall remain. As for the host of labor, it has been in the dirt since history began, and I read history aright. And in the dirt it shall remain so long as I and mine and those that come after us have the power. There is the word. It is the king of words--Power. Not God, not Mammon, but Power. Pour it over your tongue till it tingles with it. Power."

[Jack London, The Iron Heel]

 

And the same is true for either. Labor costs and salaries do not increase with the level of revenue and/or profits of the company or industry. They are based on supply and demand. In this particular example, the wages of football players in Europe are based on the overall market in Europe, not compartmentalized to just the EPL or La Liga. If EPL clubs begin to take in more revenue, the players can demand a cut, but if the clubs can just go and get a player from Spain willing to play for less, they will.

And yet again, the idea that bonuses are reflective of the revenue of the company is a standard in the financial industry. Not in the sporting industry. Bonuses in professional sports are based on individual acheivement. You are comparing apples and oranges here.

Well, yes, OVER TIME salaries naturally increase due to cost of living, growth of industry and supply and demand. Show me were the salaries of ALL NFL players grew substantially after a single year of increased revenue by the league.

And so has the average salary of La Liga players and Serie A players......what's your point?

That has nothing to do with the point I was making, but thanks for the education on EPL finances.

 

The supply of players will not change significantly from year to year (though you may see more of the top German, French, Italian players in England) and the demand is driven by the desire to succeed (a constant) and the fruits of success (greatly up with the new deal).

Assuming that most clubs will spend according to their history (and the history of all free-market based sports), this will result in a vast increase of both the total payrolls and the individual salaries.

This is not how it'll work. There won't be any stupid union "demands" here.

It'll be simply one club buying itself $75M worth of players and other clubs needing to match or be prepared to go to Colchester or Hull for their gamedays.

And so they match.

I am not comparing apples and oranges. All I said was that it's good to be in a successful industry or a company regardless of the form of compensation. Wages are always a factor of capital seeking the available labor. The more capital (or the less labor) there is, the higher the wages can go. That's why you want to work for Goldman Sachs and for the New York Yankees and for CAA and not for the smaller versions of these businesses.

NFL salaries jumped with every new TV deal. First NFL cap was $32M in 1992. When Reggie White signed with the Packers for $17M over 4 years, the cap was $36M. Now that the cap is ~ $120M, eight-figure salaries for superstars are becoming a common thing.

The Premiership will follow the same road.

The same as it was when I posted ... the Premiership will dwarf those leagues in revenues and only the top Italian and Spanish clubs would be able to compete for players. From now on, unless you're with Real, AC Milan or Barcelona, you better be in England 'cos that's where the money will be.

Which is why it's great for Clint Dempsey to have arrived to England at this time. Even if his current contract only gives him ~ $1.-$1.3M annually, his next deal could be 4-5 times the size (with the usual proviso)

You're very welcome.

 

It may not happen so quickly in the space of just one year, but salaries will get much higher as revenues increase. With all the different levels of Euro competition and the huge issue of promotion/relegation, teams just aren't going to look for cheap replacements in Spain or wherever else.

We're talking about the highest skilled labor here. And the market being open (anybody who meets EPL requirements can play anywhere in the world) just means that better players are available--players who might require higher salaries to leave their homes in Germnay, Spain, Italy, or anywhere else. Teams that go for cheap replacements aren't going to be able to pay high salaries, because they won't last long in the top division. The open competitive market is going to drive the salaries, and without any type of salary cap, we're going to see more NHL/Leeds United type stories where teams spend more than they can afford.

As a result of this deal, salaries are going to go up next year. It's a simple as that.