Himannv
Full Member
Ugh. Hope the ownership gets sorted soon and we get them to stay.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think the suspicion is we indeed do but we shall find out, I think, as I agree if she chooses to leave for Arsenal it's probably because we ain't offering what she's worth.If she’s a United fan and we’re on an upward trajectory.. why leave? Do we really pay that much less than the likes of arsenal and Chelsea?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Even if the budget increase for the women’s team would be the first thing they’d do, it would be too late.I really don't think a better contract offer will be on the table in time. Even if the ownership issue is sorted, I doubt the club will be able to make a financial decision like this quickly enough to offer an improved contract. They'd have other things to look into first before considering the women's team and that's a real shame.
Don’t know exact figures for our players but WSL players’ wages range from as low as £20k/year to £250k/year. The average salary in the league being around £30k/year shows us it’s only a fair few who make even big-ish money. That’s your Miedemas, Kerrs, Shaws, Meads etc.Anyone know what kind of wages our top players are on? Couldn´t find any number when googling
Thanks!Don’t know exact figures for our players but WSL players’ wages range from as low as £20k/year to £250k/year. The average salary in the league being around £30k/year shows us it’s only a fair few who make even big-ish money. That’s your Miedemas, Shaws, Meads etc.
It’s reported that our domestic rivals have offered about double the wages we’ve offered to Russo. Same thing when it comes to top foreign clubs with Batlle.
Which makes me estimate that our offers for both players have been around £100-150k/year = £2000-3000k/w.
Just shows how incredibly low budget the women's team have been given. And how good a job they've done with this in mind.Thanks!
Just feels incredible that the wage should be any issue for us here.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
And not for the best of reasons. Anyway I’m pleased that the person at least apologised. Although following that up with ”it was a misunderstanding” kind of voids that and makes it a non-pology.Manchester United women has made the first page of swedens biggest sport paper, and not for fotballing reasons:
https://www.aftonbladet.se/sportbla...efen-kritiseras-efter-orden-till-alessa-russo
Erm hasn't our womens team make a profit to date? I'm sure I've seen that before, so would hardly say that's the owners spending a fair bit, and just imagine where they'd be if those owners didn't get rid of the team in the first place?Is the salary cap still a thing on the WSL, if it is then this is what could be affecting us.
For sure the Owners could happily pump in more money to allow the salaries to rise, as I am sure has been the case at Chelsea and City, but that would then create an unsustainable business model with no room for error.
Whilst United need to carry on growing, they can't just chuck more money at it (the owners have actually spent a fair bit on the women's team already), they have to be sensible and rely on the fact these players want to be here.
Champions League football should be enough for players to want to stay, and another season of growth should hopefully happen.
Once again: Not many female players ever gets a chance to make the kind of money that would help them secure a future for themselves, let alone their families, possible kids etc. If they get one chance to sign a big contract, no-one should have any complaints about them doing so. I'd say 100% of us would jump at the chance to change employers if someone offered a 100% raise to do the same job.Is the salary cap still a thing on the WSL, if it is then this is what could be affecting us.
For sure the Owners could happily pump in more money to allow the salaries to rise, as I am sure has been the case at Chelsea and City, but that would then create an unsustainable business model with no room for error.
Whilst United need to carry on growing, they can't just chuck more money at it (the owners have actually spent a fair bit on the women's team already), they have to be sensible and rely on the fact these players want to be here.
Champions League football should be enough for players to want to stay, and another season of growth should hopefully happen.
The women's team have been backed heavily by the owners, new training pitches for example. Lots of talk at the start of this season about how to increase the budget.Erm hasn't our womens team make a profit to date? I'm sure I've seen that before, so would hardly say that's the owners spending a fair bit, and just imagine where they'd be if those owners didn't get rid of the team in the first place?
Can we please not blame the players when they're being offered significantly more money elsewhere when it's not like in the men's game where they'd be minted wherever they went. This is another issue that once again stems from our awful ownership that don't actually care about success.
That apology is terrible. His shit eating grin while talking about the weight said everything about his intentions.Manchester United women has made the first page of swedens biggest sport paper, and not for fotballing reasons:
https://www.aftonbladet.se/sportbla...efen-kritiseras-efter-orden-till-alessa-russo
The trophy blunder has gone viral worldwide!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) dateTweet
— Twitter API (@user) dateTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
According to a Deloitte report earlier in the year United's women's team had the 2nd highest revenues in the world (behind Barcelona) in the 2021/22 season despite never having qualified for the Champions League at that point. On the other hand the club has the 5th largest budget in the WSL despite having finished 4th for 3 seasons in a row and now finishing 2nd. To claim that this team has been well backed by the owners (who don't spend a penny on anything to do with the club by the way) given that, as well as us losing our previous manager due to the shoddy facilities which they've only just started improving recently, is not right at all.The women's team have been backed heavily by the owners, new training pitches for example. Lots of talk at the start of this season about how to increase the budget.
Which is why I found it strange when people were complaining about opening up the ability to buy season tickets on here.
The owners could in theory just throw money at the women's team to increase the budget and allow for greater wages, but that wouldn't be sustainable in the long nor short term.
The complete contrast in how people think regards the women's team and men's team is intriguing to me.
Yes context has to come into play somewhat but we have people crowing about how the mens team are over paid and we give out high contracts too easily and often,
Yet the women's team we want the owners to chuck as much money as possible to tie players up on high contracts despite the fact it will have detrimental impact on the team as a whole (less income, less profitability, less wages to go around, less transfer money to spend etc).
That's really generous of the owners as they could've simply trained in the car park.The women's team have been backed heavily by the owners, new training pitches for example. Lots of talk at the start of this season about how to increase the budget.
Which is why I found it strange when people were complaining about opening up the ability to buy season tickets on here.
The owners could in theory just throw money at the women's team to increase the budget and allow for greater wages, but that wouldn't be sustainable in the long nor short term.
The complete contrast in how people think regards the women's team and men's team is intriguing to me.
Yes context has to come into play somewhat but we have people crowing about how the mens team are over paid and we give out high contracts too easily and often,
Yet the women's team we want the owners to chuck as much money as possible to tie players up on high contracts despite the fact it will have detrimental impact on the team as a whole (less income, less profitability, less wages to go around, less transfer money to spend etc).
Can't tell if you're being purposely disingenuous or not? If investing in training facilities using club funds is being backed heavily by owners then that is a very generous definition. Surely if they are backing the womens team so heavily we wouldn't be making profits from the womens team right?The women's team have been backed heavily by the owners, new training pitches for example. Lots of talk at the start of this season about how to increase the budget.
Which is why I found it strange when people were complaining about opening up the ability to buy season tickets on here.
The owners could in theory just throw money at the women's team to increase the budget and allow for greater wages, but that wouldn't be sustainable in the long nor short term.
The complete contrast in how people think regards the women's team and men's team is intriguing to me.
Yes context has to come into play somewhat but we have people crowing about how the mens team are over paid and we give out high contracts too easily and often,
Yet the women's team we want the owners to chuck as much money as possible to tie players up on high contracts despite the fact it will have detrimental impact on the team as a whole (less income, less profitability, less wages to go around, less transfer money to spend etc).
We’ve already lost a historical and talismanic leader (Casey Stoney) based on the club not being serious enough about competing. There are undoubtedly people involved directly in building the team (picked by Murtaugh?) who are doing a sound and very good job, but if the owners and Arnold doesn’t back it up to the levelto be expected from Man United, it will be a matter of time before that disintegrates. The best players, and the most ambitious people, will go where the commitment is mosr serious, top down.Just shows how incredibly low budget the women's team have been given. And how good a job they've done with this in mind.
Phil Jones' released weekly wages could be used to more than double the women's combined costs!Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Do you know if the WSL still has a 40% of turnover salary cap?Don’t know exact figures for our players but WSL players’ wages range from as low as £20k/year to £250k/year. The average salary in the league being around £30k/year shows us it’s only a fair few who make even big-ish money. That’s your Miedemas, Kerrs, Shaws, Meads etc.
It’s reported that our domestic rivals have offered about double the wages we’ve offered to Russo. Same thing when it comes to top foreign clubs with Batlle.
Which makes me estimate that our offers for both players have been around £100-150k/year = £2000-3000k/w.
Yeah it seems so.Do you know if the WSL still has a 40% of turnover salary cap?
Okay, I don't know what our turnover is. But you'd like to think the Champions League qualification would provide a bit more money to offer in wages in that regard.Yeah it seems so.
Looking at the attendance figures etc. from our rivals, I somehow doubt that their turnover is a 100% more than ours. Yet they can offer double wages to what we do.Okay, I don't know what our turnover is. But you'd like to think the Champions League qualification would provide a bit more money to offer in wages in that regard.
Is this stipulated on the Womens Super League web page with all the details the teams have to follow? We definitely need to get our hands on that, our at least have someone smart study it and make a recap of it.Do you know if the WSL still has a 40% of turnover salary cap?
I don't know all the financial stuff. The last figure I remember seeing for investment was the £1.5m back in our first season and £700k trickling down in sponsorship. Be interesting to know how much more others put in and how much ours has changed in the 4-5 years since. I'm sure I remember reading (or hearing on a broadcast) most of the top 6 are about investing 1.5% of the men's team turnover.Looking at the attendance figures etc. from our rivals, I somehow doubt that their turnover is a 100% more than ours. Yet they can offer double wages to what we do.
I just remember there being noise about trying to get to the salary cap increased. A quick google only brings up info on a 40% cap.Is this stipulated on the Womens Super League web page with all the details the teams have to follow? We definitely need to get our hands on that, our at least have someone smart study it and make a recap of it.