The end is nigh.

[Concrete John]

True, but if we argue that MON has an influence on negotiating player contracts at Villa, who are a very well run club, then surely the same is true of Harry at Spurs?  Is it such a huge jump in logic to say that whatever tactics he used at Pompey might also be employed at Spurs?    

There may be nothing in it, but I think it's wrong to simply dismiss it as a 'conspiracy theory'.

[saunders_heroes]

Sorry, but I think what's happening at his previous club is a valid point when discussing Redknapp/Spurs/wages.

Well, other than the fact that they are two entirely different football clubs, one of which is a PLC, the other which seems to have been run shambolically.

Is he still out on bail?

[pauliewalnuts]

True, but if we argue that MON has an influence on negotiating player contracts at Villa, who are a very well run club, then surely the same is true of Harry at Spurs?  Is it such a huge jump in logic to say that whatever tactics he used at Pompey might also be employed at Spurs?    

There may be nothing in it, but I think it's wrong to simply dismiss it as a 'conspiracy theory'.

First, you have to assume that Redknapp was the prime mover in how players were paid at Portsmouth. I'd have thought that would be Storrie.

Then you'd have to assume that Spurs are doing the same thing, despite the extra scrutiny they're under as a PLC.

Then you have to assume that they're doing it because Redknapp has been allowed into a position where he can influence that.

It gets even more conspiracy theory when you factor in the interest HMRC take in that sort of thing.

Spurs have had a reputation for running a strict wages policy for ages. It's really not that stretching of credulity that they should have a lower bill than us. Take Modric and his 25k a week, for example. He's come from Croatian football. Great bit of business by Spurs to get him so cheaply.

We're known for buying players already playing in the UK - bar, what, two signings, they have all come from that market - a market where transfer fees and wages are massively inflated.

[pauliewalnuts]

Sorry, but I think what's happening at his previous club is a valid point when discussing Redknapp/Spurs/wages.

Well, other than the fact that they are two entirely different football clubs, one of which is a PLC, the other which seems to have been run shambolically.

Is he still out on bail?

That was about his personal tax. You're first of all assuming he's guilty of that, and then assuming that he's allowed to engage in dodginess at Tottenham, which seems very unlikely, and a bit too convenient an argument.

Still, if the cap fits.

[Monty]

Take Modric and his 25k a week, for example. He's come from Croatian football. Great bit of business by Spurs to get him so cheaply.

We're known for buying players already playing in the UK - bar, what, two signings, they have all come from that market - a market where transfer fees and wages are massively inflated.

This is the crux of the matter. If you are the first to take the chance on an obvious talent from a lesser league, you could give him a long-term contract for comparatively little a week, with the high-wage new contract up your sleeve if their should be worrying interest from a Manchester United or a Chelsea. By paying only established players from this country, we have to match their wage demands which are already at a premium. This is clearly not a good strategy with our current turnover. If we were to get into the Champions' League then sure, no problem - at the moment though, as Capello would say, "is problem".

[saunders_heroes]

Sorry, but I think what's happening at his previous club is a valid point when discussing Redknapp/Spurs/wages.

Well, other than the fact that they are two entirely different football clubs, one of which is a PLC, the other which seems to have been run shambolically.

Is he still out on bail?

That was about his personal tax. You're first of all assuming he's guilty of that, and then assuming that he's allowed to engage in dodginess at Tottenham, which seems very unlikely, and a bit too convenient an argument.

Still, if the cap fits.

He's as dodgy as they come. How many times has he been arrested now? two, three times?
Yeah, the cap certainly fits.

[Concrete John]

First, you have to assume that Redknapp was the prime mover in how players were paid at Portsmouth. I'd have thought that would be Storrie.

Yet we blame Martin for our wage bill?  I can't accept that he has any more influenec on these things at Villa than Redknapp did at Portsmouth.

Then you'd have to assume that Spurs are doing the same thing, despite the extra scrutiny they're under as a PLC.

Then you have to assume that they're doing it because Redknapp has been allowed into a position where he can influence that.

I'll give you the extra scrutiny bit, but surely as the manager he IS in a position to at least influence these things?

It gets even more conspiracy theory when you factor in the interest HMRC take in that sort of thing.

Yet if he thought he was getting away with it at Pompey (in all fairness this is a recent development in their ongoing saga) that would hardly stop him?

Spurs have had a reputation for running a strict wages policy for ages. It's really not that stretching of credulity that they should have a lower bill than us. Take Modric and his 25k a week, for example. He's come from Croatian football. Great bit of business by Spurs to get him so cheaply.

We're known for buying players already playing in the UK - bar, what, two signings, they have all come from that market - a market where transfer fees and wages are massively inflated.

I've debated this on here before, but that reputation was from the policy of singing young players and developing them, such as with Lennon and Huddlestone.  Redknapp is different in bringing players like Defoe and Crouch back to the club on much higher wages.  

Yes, our transfer stratergy does require high wages and yes Modric is an example of where they've done very well, but I do feel that they will slowly see this gap closing aslong as Harry is their boss.

[pauliewalnuts]

First, you have to assume that Redknapp was the prime mover in how players were paid at Portsmouth. I'd have thought that would be Storrie.

Yet we blame Martin for our wage bill?  I can't accept that he has any more influenec on these things at Villa than Redknapp did at Portsmouth.

There's a difference between how much you pay players and how you pay them, especially if you're suggesting that the method of payment is dodgy.

We've got evidence that we have a high wage bill. Where's the evidence that Spurs are paying people through image rights to maintain a low wage bill on their accounts. And besides which, why would they?

Then you'd have to assume that Spurs are doing the same thing, despite the extra scrutiny they're under as a PLC.

Then you have to assume that they're doing it because Redknapp has been allowed into a position where he can influence that.

I'll give you the extra scrutiny bit, but surely as the manager he IS in a position to at least influence these things?

What, to get Spurs to fall foul of HMRC? Why would they want to?

It gets even more conspiracy theory when you factor in the interest HMRC take in that sort of thing.

Yet if he thought he was getting away with it at Pompey (in all fairness this is a recent development in their ongoing saga) that would hardly stop him?

Spurs have had a reputation for running a strict wages policy for ages. It's really not that stretching of credulity that they should have a lower bill than us. Take Modric and his 25k a week, for example. He's come from Croatian football. Great bit of business by Spurs to get him so cheaply.

We're known for buying players already playing in the UK - bar, what, two signings, they have all come from that market - a market where transfer fees and wages are massively inflated.

I've debated this on here before, but that reputation was from the policy of singing young players and developing them, such as with Lennon and Huddlestone.  Redknapp is different in bringing players like Defoe and Crouch back to the club on much higher wages.  

No, they've had a reputation for a tight pay policy, full stop, not just on younger players.

Yes, our transfer stratergy does require high wages and yes Modric is an example of where they've done very well, but I do feel that they will slowly see this gap closing aslong as Harry is their boss.

That may or may be the case, but for the now, the figures we're talking about, you could look at Modric as one example for why it is like that now.

There's plenty of evidence for their wage bill being lower - it is there in black and white in the published accounts of both clubs.

There is no evidence whatsoever for that being the case because they're paying players by back door methods, as much as we'd like to point the finger at Redknapp.

[Dave Clark Five]

Well, each side of any argument will have it's extremes, but I'd like to think that even those most adamant MON supporters see 6th as a midway point between where we were and where we're trying to get to.

Randy seems to have come to a similar conclusion to those in the former camp and that is why MON will be our manager this coming season.[/quote]

What action on Mr. Lerner's part gives you that impression?[/quote]

The fact that we have the same manager as we did last season, surely if he had serious misgivings he'd have done something about it.[/quote]

Maybe they will be on speaking terms soon.

[Concrete John]

There is no evidence whatsoever for that being the case because they're paying players by back door methods, as much as we'd like to point the finger at Redknapp.

There was no evidence of it at Portsmouth either until quite recently.

I'm not saying that there is or isn't any shennanigans going on with Spurs wage policy, just that the theory that there is is lent greater credence by what we are seeing at Pompey at the moment.

[Dave Cooper please]

There is no evidence whatsoever for that being the case because they're paying players by back door methods, as much as we'd like to point the finger at Redknapp.

There was no evidence of it at Portsmouth either until quite recently.

There is, however, evidence that the dodgy 'image rights' deals were done after Redknapp left once the owners realised how much shit they were in with regards to money owed to HMRC.

[Chris Smith]

Well, each side of any argument will have it's extremes, but I'd like to think that even those most adamant MON supporters see 6th as a midway point between where we were and where we're trying to get to.

Randy seems to have come to a similar conclusion to those in the former camp and that is why MON will be our manager this coming season.

What action on Mr. Lerner's part gives you that impression?[/quote]

The fact that we have the same manager as we did last season, surely if he had serious misgivings he'd have done something about it.[/quote]

Maybe they will be on speaking terms soon.[/quote]

More gossip round the dinner table?

[Dave Clark Five]

More gossip round the dinner table?

Yes. It came from a very good sauce.

[old man villa fan]

We do have a lot more admin staff it seems.  However, most of those won't be on any more than £20K a year, which doesn't go anywhere near to explaining teh difference.

Thanks for your objective response, unlike some posters.

I only raised the question as to whether it is possible in club accounts to show payments for 'labour' in places other than just in staff salaries e.g. if subcontracted as a creditor or even off the books if a player controls his own image rights outside of the UK i.e. the club pay a player less in exchange for him controlling the sale of his own image under his own separate company outside UK tax by reciprocal tax agreement with country where his company is set up.

It seems to have opened up the hornets nest again and I wished I handn't bothered asking the question.

Somebody responded last night saying that he believed the internet article I referred to was made up.  Obviously some guys know the source from experience.

I said that was one take on it but by the later responses another take on it could be 'meet that super pay' (anagram), perhaps. Don't take it seriously, guys.

[pauliewalnuts]

Thanks for your objective response, unlike some posters.

You're getting quite a thing for being unable to post anything which doesn't contain at least one veiled dig at other people.

There's no need for it.