- Mar 18, 2005
- 34,285
- 83,498
I voted yes.
Looking at our last annual accounts is meaningless given:
1) It doesn't include the money made from CL
2) It doesn't include the revenue from the reported Nike deal
3) From next season onwards, our capacity will be at least 61K for the foreseeable future (Wembley as much as 90K)
I am not sure how much we're paying rent for Wembley but I'd hazard a guess we'll make more matchday revenue there than we are currently receiving at WHL. I think at the time of the deal being announced, Levy said the money would be the same (debunking the accusation that the Wembley move was financially motivated) but that was when the capacity was capped at 50K. It has since been increased to 90K and the ticket prices are effectively the same as this year.
I totally agree with people who say we should spend within our means but the above indicates that are means have increased. I am sure Levy already knows this. You can bet the players' agents will also be looking at that.
We still have a stadium to pay so rather than pay out fees and wages on numerous new signings to replace players we couldn't keep, I'd rather pay more to the existing lot.
But why?
If players were leaving for more money Id understand but they're not.
If we have the choice of paying a player running low on his contract an extra £20k a week, ie TA, or buying a new player then sure extend the contract.
But paying players extra just for the sake of it seems a ludicrous strategy.