View Full Version : Agents fees paid by clubs in last year

28-11-2014, 04:42 PM
The figures for the current Premier League clubs over the last 12 months - up to 30th Sep 2014.

Arsenal 4,293,407
Aston Villa 2,577,866
Burnley 711,024
Chelsea 16,771,328
Crystal Palace 2,200,797
Everton 5,753,269
Hull 2,459,010
Leicester 1,608,418
Liverpool 14,308,444
Man City 12,811,946
Man Utd 7,975,556
Newcastle 3,876,250
QPR 3,242,668
Southampton 2,766,444
Stoke 3,986,850
Sunderland 5,276,674
Swansea 3,784,090
Tottenham 10,983,011
West Brom 3,493,745
West Ham 6,380,339

28-11-2014, 04:46 PM
Glad we have kept this relatively low. The amount of money agents take is obscene for not really doing a lot. Just dead money for the club.

The Bedlington Terrier
28-11-2014, 04:48 PM
All round, that's a lot of dosh!

28-11-2014, 04:56 PM
Lowest two were two of last season's Championship clubs although it does include all the fees in the last window after promotion.

28-11-2014, 05:06 PM
Chelsea 16,771,328
Liverpool 14,308,444
Man City 12,811,946
Tottenham 10,983,011

Burnley 711,024

Puts it all in perspective! They can spend more on agents fees than we're able to spend on players!


28-11-2014, 05:12 PM
Nice to see us in 3rd spot for this one XD

Though, seriously, pretty glad we were bottom. A lot of wasted money on agents fees especially by the big teams.

Maybe it will see us a few quid for our war chest come January ;D

Let's see if we are still bottom in 12 months. I think not, especially if we can stay up.


28-11-2014, 05:14 PM
They spend more on agents fees than us precisely because they spend more on players than us. I suppose a congratulatory pat on the club's back is harmless and it's nice to know that compared with, say, Liverpool, less of our hard earned is lining agents' pockets than Liverpool fans' hard earned, but this is largely what you'd expect from being the lowest spenders in the league by a quite significant margin, right?

28-11-2014, 05:47 PM
I would much rather see us, grow and nurture the team with astute and added value additions that compliment what we already have than try and buy overnight success like many others have tried and often failed.

It should be a marathon, not a sprint for little old Burnley. Our history has proven that this is our best chance of success over a longer period.

28-11-2014, 06:35 PM
Again it shows just how remarkable our promotion season was.

28-11-2014, 06:38 PM
It's alright laughing now but when we sign Messi in January, we'll have egg on our face!

28-11-2014, 06:59 PM
Would settle for 2 or 3 less extravagant players who will do us a good job no matter what. Then I'll be laughing XD

28-11-2014, 07:53 PM
Nice to see that leicester have proven themselves to be a better run, more professional and better in all departments football club, by having spent well over twice as much as Burnley last year. Well done Foxes!

28-11-2014, 08:09 PM
Hasn't got the Foxes many more points than us though yet has it.

Fees are not everything :P

28-11-2014, 08:26 PM
Out of curiosity - what would the estimated transfer fees be on our Agent spend? 700k seems quite high for the amount of money we spend?

28-11-2014, 08:28 PM
Although jdrobbo doesn't usually do sarcasm, I think he did here.

28-11-2014, 08:36 PM
Bet it was a lot bigger the year or two before at the Foxes though.

28-11-2014, 08:37 PM
And I ain't being sarcastic here either :/

28-11-2014, 09:00 PM
I think you're right.

Whichever way you look at it, these amounts are bloody scandalous. When you think that some agents have scores of "clients" they're just another bunch of gravy train merchants.

28-11-2014, 09:04 PM
Jobs and money for The Boys me thinks.

28-11-2014, 09:21 PM
"Out of curiosity - what would the estimated transfer fees be on our Agent spend? 700k seems quite high for the amount of money we spend?"

Agreed clarethomer, it seems high and probably represents about 10% of our total spend from Barnes through to Boyd.

Interestingly in the five previous years we spent 468k in total on agents fees.

28-11-2014, 09:38 PM
% of transfer fees probably isn't a great way to measure it, considering Taylor was on a free and I'd guess is the second biggest contract we've done + it's easy to imagine Reid having a big time agent and all. Then chuck in big time contracts for Trippier and Vokes and you're looking at a much bigger picture.

Whatever you think of the prevalence of agents in modern football it's just something Burnley have to grin and bear as a Premier League club.

28-11-2014, 09:48 PM
Did we actually pay a fee for Reid?

28-11-2014, 09:49 PM
No, but we'll have paid agents in signing him

28-11-2014, 09:57 PM
Pay a third party when someones signed for nothing? what on earth for.

28-11-2014, 10:02 PM
Negotiating the contract

28-11-2014, 10:07 PM

XD Negotiating the contract eh.. are right.

And I'm laughing at the system and not you, PFA missed a trick there years ago as that should have been their job.

28-11-2014, 10:17 PM
The really depressing thing is that over 110m left football and went into the pockets of parasites. Imagine what that could have done to help the clubs in the bottom two leagues.

28-11-2014, 10:19 PM
Would be much more useful information if the figures were broken down by transfer for each club.

29-11-2014, 03:12 AM
We`ve got a lot of catching up to do!

29-11-2014, 05:16 AM
i think as from January our budget is bound to increase with the recruit of an agent to roam about in Europe for new talents .

29-11-2014, 06:00 AM
110 million? good grief >:(

29-11-2014, 06:02 AM
On a slightly off topic point didn't Brian Flynn when he was at Wrexham refuse to pay agents fees?

29-11-2014, 09:12 AM
James Milner uses the PFA as his agents. He was on a programme about agents and I don't think he agrees with the way they milk money out of clubs and players. Said the PFA do a good job. Doesn't look to have done him any harm so I can't understand why more don't use them.

29-11-2014, 09:42 AM
I read this morning that each of the four highest paid out more in agents fees than ALL 24 League Two clubs paid out in wages in total.