|
Post by rickyqpr on Jun 24, 2020 19:29:06 GMT
Amazing that close to £50m was spent in the Championship in 12 months on agents. (table below) We may not have 'bought' many players during that time, but agents still get their cut and it shows just what player signing on fees must be. Seems we are 14th in most leagues! The figures foe the Prem for the same period was £263m with Liverpool topping the spend at £30m. Man City £29m, ManUtd £27m and Chelsea £26M. Burnley lowest at £4m. Crazy times...............
Agents Fees 1/2/19 -31/1/20
1 Stoke 5683904
2 Swansea 5199242
3 Fulham 4428786
4 Leeds 4030846
5 Cardiff 3462349
6 Brentford 3362724
7 WBA 2807344
8 Huddersfield 2355049
9 Derby 2142953
10 Birmingham 1889678
11 Bristol City 1889161
12 Middlesborough 1447315
13 Sheffield Wed 1356630
14 QPR 1272603
15 Preston N.E. 1252983
16 Notts Forest 1237510
17 Reading 1176989
18 Blackburn 1158808
19 Wigan 1051876
20 Hull 606551
21 Millwall 571851
22 Barnsley 311935
23 Charlton 303896
24 Luton 298140
Total £49,299,123
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Jun 25, 2020 16:09:23 GMT
Liverpool have topped the Premier League table for fees paid to players’ agents for the third successive year, the Football Association has revealed.
The Premier League champions-elect have slashed payments by almost a third, according to the FA’s latest figures – which cover the 2019 summer and 2020 winter transfer windows.
Liverpool spent GBP 30.3million on intermediaries compared with nearly GBP 44m the previous year, but that is still the most of any top flight club.
Under FIFA rules, the FA has been publishing the total payments made by clubs in England’s top five divisions to agents for the last three years, as well as a list of every transfer which involved an agent.
Despite Liverpool’s reduction and the Premier League’s efforts to bring down the amount clubs spend on middlemen, the combined figures show an increase from GBP 261m to GBP 263.3m for the top flight.
The top four, as in the two previous years, comprises Liverpool, Manchester City (GBP 29m), Manchester United (GBP 27.6m) and Chelsea (GBP 26.2m).
Everton (GBP 16.9m) are the fifth biggest spenders on agents’ fees, according to the FA’s figures, with Arsenal (GBP 13.6m), West Ham (GBP 13.2m) and Tottenham (GBP 12.5m) making up the top eight.
Burnley (GBP 3.9m) forked out the least of any top flight club, with Sheffield United (GBP 4.3m) and Norwich (GBP 4.9m) making up the bottom three.
Championship clubs paid out a combined GBP 49.3m, slightly down on last year’s GBP 50m, with Stoke (GBP 5.6m) and Swansea (GBP 5.2m) topping the list.
League One sides spent GBP 3.9m, down from almost GBP 6m with Sunderland accounting for nearly GBP 1.4m, and League Two clubs gave agents GBP 1.2m, a slight increase from just under GBP 1million.
The total figures for all top five divisions show English football spent just over GBP 318m on agents, which is almost GBP 80,000 down on a year ago.
|
|
|
Post by Roller on Jun 27, 2020 5:17:40 GMT
If this is showing the amounts actually paid, not all of the costs would have been incurred in the period the payments relate to. Agents' fees are spread across the length of the players' contracts and, on rae occasions, are still being paid after the player has moved on.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Jun 27, 2020 8:03:12 GMT
If this is showing the amounts actually paid, not all of the costs would have been incurred in the period the payments relate to. Agents' fees are spread across the length of the players' contracts and, on rae occasions, are still being paid after the player has moved on.Roller, Roller, you are probably correct, the definition is 'payments made during the period via the FA Clearing Account'
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Jul 1, 2020 5:32:03 GMT
Some one is getting very rich for doing next to nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Jul 2, 2020 9:18:41 GMT
Some one is getting very rich for doing next to nothing. Quite. Why on earth don't clubs simply get together and collectively agree that, if players want to use an agent, the agent's fee should be paid for by the player alone.
I don't have a problem with player's using agents - they do work in the player's interest to get as good a deal for them as possible. Why won't that happen? Because the big clubs with the big money can easily afford these ludicrous agents' fees - and gain a significant competitive advantage in doing so compared to clubs who can't afford them. Hardly financial 'fair play'...
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Jul 2, 2020 9:33:16 GMT
Some one is getting very rich for doing next to nothing. Quite. Why on earth don't clubs simply get together and collectively agree that, if players want to use an agent, the agent's fee should be paid for by the player alone.
I don't have a problem with player's using agents - they do work in the player's interest to get as good a deal for them as possible. Why won't that happen? Because the big clubs with the big money can easily afford these ludicrous agents' fees - and gain a significant competitive advantage in doing so compared to clubs who can't afford them. Hardly financial 'fair play'... Of course the player should pay his own agents' fees. I think they did when this species first became involved in football. You will never get all clubs to agree to follow this all the time because it will only take one club to cave in & the rest will follow. If two clubs are wishing to purchase the same player & have offered the same wages, the chances are one of those clubs will win by paying the agent fee.
|
|