Chelsea's annual wage bill has soared to £172.5million
-
CHELSEA'S wage bill has hit a mind-blowing £172million - and that does not even include the salaries of deadline-day signings Fernando Torres and David Luiz.
The annual total is almost £20m more than the previous year and dwarfs Manchester City's payout by £39m.
The astonishing figure was revealed in Chelsea's full annual accounts for 2010.
Mega-rich City spent £133m in the same period - £1m more than their bitter crosstown rivals Manchester United.
Arsenal were in fourth place with a £110m bill.
Roman Abramovich's Blues spent £166m in 2009 but that included £12.6m in pay-offs to sacked boss Big Phil Scolari and his assistants.
The Stamford Bridge outfit also reported eye-watering losses of £70.9m compared to just £44.4m the year before.
They insist losses will be cut in the next financial year to meet UEFA's new 'financial fair play' rule.
The club will also be liable for an extra £3.8m in National Insurance if the HMRC argues that image rights payments should be taxed.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
chelsea is not yet a football brand in the class of Real, Man Utd, Bayern etc. I don't think they will ever be because their success started with money.
OH NIGGA.. -
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
chelsea is not yet a football brand in the class of Real, Man Utd, Bayern etc. I don't think they will ever be because their success started with money.
everything starts with money.
they have a good academy which is producing good footaballers. scott sinclair, bensahar, mirslov stoch etc...
u just need time for these youngsters to make it big. but whether they are gonna make it big in CHELSEA is another different issue.
sure chelsea may not be at the top level based on the number of supporters, but mind u, chelsea is a global brand incase you dont know...
-
Yup, it's probably 7 yrs since Roman took over and they have grown a great deal only within 7 yrs...
So I won't discount them as a possible big club able to stand on their own feet in the future cos there is always that possibility...
It probably takes about 2 decades or a new generation who have grown up during their most successful period to build themselves and I think they are halfway or one third there now...
If there is one thing that history has taught us, then I guess it's, you have to start somewhere small first before you grow to become a "big club"... and Chelsea are way ahead in this direction compare to some others...
And sustain success is what it will take to determine whether you remain a "big club" over time just like the likes of Nottingham Forest, Leeds, Newcastle, Ipswich... Who were ones considered "big clubs" themselves in different periods of time... But their inability to sustain their success have made them a lesser club today...
So I belief the opportunity is always there and the rotating cycle will continue to bring new clubs like they have with today's big 4, or 5 we know... Just like 10 yrs ago, the likes of Spurs and City probably wasn't there either but today they are... So opportunities will always be there for the lesser clubs to grow...
-
And I think clubs like Spurs are also buying and buying...
-
Originally posted by Y_Shun:
everything starts with money.
they have a good academy which is producing good footaballers. scott sinclair, bensahar, mirslov stoch etc...
u just need time for these youngsters to make it big. but whether they are gonna make it big in CHELSEA is another different issue.
sure chelsea may not be at the top level based on the number of supporters, but mind u, chelsea is a global brand incase you dont know...
sadly, with the big buys, Chelsea shows their youth academy is not doing so well.