They still have to pay the minimum, so even if there entire list was trash, they would still have to pay some of them overs just to reach the base percentage (90% or something similar).
Gary Ablett leaves GCS⌠Dusty Martin arrives at GCS.
Thereâs some massive culture shift going on right there.
Not sure if theyâre into Martin, they may well be, but theyâre big into Lever. Theyâre getting their house in order first by signing their own players not just OOC this year but also next. Already re-signed JJ, Daniel, Smith, Wood etc but also working on Bontempelli whoâs OOC (I think) next year. Also told a bit depends on whether Murphy goes on or not. Might be an interesting off season with clubs having that extra cap space. Might be an idea to hang out until next year when a lot of clubs have used their âbonusâ cap space.
Lever to replace morris?
might be Gary Ablett saying this club is Farked as he walks out the door at the end of the year.
I donât think whoreforn will touch him.
Hawthorn already have enough players with underworld connectionsâŚ
2 Likes
Thereâs always a lot of talk regarding money in respect of big-name players potentially moving, but some context is important. Whatever gross figure is quoted in the media (say, in Martinâs case, $1m p.a.), the player actually sees less than half that - 3-5% goes straight into the pocket of his agent, then 47% goes to the ATO (45% top marginal rate + 2% Medicare Levy).
So, if a guy like Martin is looking at deals that are $100k p.a. apart in gross terms, to him personally thatâs really only worth ~$45k p.a. net of all taxes and agent commissions. Thatâs why i donât think the gross annual salary is really the differentiating factor - what likely matters more to the (financially rational) player is duration and loading/spread of contracted payments.
Players fall under the provisions of entertainers which means there taxable income is averaged out over a number of years.
2 Likes
Apart from Yacoâs point, this also cuts both ways. Those going, âwell, theyâre already getting this huge money, more doesnât matterâ, well if you cut everything for taxes and fees, the starting point is also a lot smaller. So suddenly the increase even in net terms may look larger.
Remember how the Buddy move blindsided everyone?
1 Like
Yes but this only really helps you at the start and end of your career if you happen to fall into lower tax brackets.
Once youâre consistently over $180K (and most even average footballers will get this) there is little benefit to the averaging. Itâs not meant for big, long, money football contracts.
1 Like
Every time someone mentions shin boner spirit all I can think of is lamb shanks.
2 Likes
Depending on how much of their income the player can alienate as being derived by their âimageâ, the rights to which are owned by a family trust most likely.
I would certainly trade away two first rounders if thatâs what it took to the giants. If we couldnât accommodate a trade for both, it would certainly be Kelly over Dusty.
I know how good Martin is going this year too. J Kelly has proven he can do all that at age 22, and he will just keep getting better.
1 Like
Can anyone see Norff in say 5 years playing more than 8 games in melbourne, I for one canât⌠Inevitable they are going to play most of their games in Tassie so any player thinking of going to the tin rattlers for the big $$ (that we & other clubs are actually paying for) would want to make sure theyre happy to be spending most of their time between melb & tassie
2 Likes
Thanks, i didnât know that. Even if the tax expense is amortized equally as you say, that doesnât change the fact that the player will financially benefit if a contract is front-loaded - basic time value of money concept.
Thatâs the wrong way to think about it - what matters isnât what heâs earning now, but what the marginal difference in future contracts is worth to him. If he has two choices between $1m p.a. and $1.1m p.a., then the marginal difference that represents to him per year is about $45k net of taxes and expenses. If heâs earning $1m p.a., heâs netting about $500k, and letâs say he has an exorbitant lifestyle which costs $150k p.a., meaning heâs saving $350k p.a. - the question is, at that point: is saving an extra $45k p.a. that he would if he went for the $1.1m deal really enough to change his mind? I donât know personally, but i suspect the consideration is perhaps less significant than is sometimes made out.
Yeah you just know Sydney are going to somehow land him, their best 22 last week had what 9 rookies? They will have the money after Reid/McVeigh go and they can offload Tippett and pay part of his salary somewhere.
Just hope we are into Kelly, reckon we could land him
1 Like
Just a little point - that is hardly an âexorbitant lifestyleâ, man.
Yeah, Iâm doing that in blow and hookers weeklyâŚ
6 Likes