It was interesting that he basically said that the Nix were in the top 6 spenders.
this alone is an interesting statement. follow up questions that i have would be (some here might know the answers)
1. is this measured, monitored and reportted upon among APL clubs?
2. you say top 6. is this 6th, or top 6?
3. if you were 7th, would you say 'top 7'?
in the 90s, every mall that ever opened in NZ i would say it was the biggest mall in the southern hemisphere.
if the club said 'it's none of your business' that would be 100% cool. but if generic statements are being rolled out to support a narrative, i.e. that the club are doing their bit, some people naturally become interested in the detail behind it.
also, if we're talking player budget, maybe chico made a difference, but otherwise, i cant reconcile that statement.
Wonder if it includes having to pay out contracts or is it Chief over valuing some senior players? Or negotiating poorly with injury prone players?
Because I can’t see it on the field for most of the season.
Also if the top four are 5-7 million and then we’re 2.3 million, we might be in the top 6 but we’re still behind the 8 ball.
in most cases paying out contracts would be a fraction of the value of the time remaining on the contract. if the contract paid out were multi year, I don't think they were, it could bring some future costs in to the curret season.
maybe they also built the budget around marco?
if the statement's true, they're being ripped off. if it applies to organisation-wide costs (academy, facilities, event costs, etc), then it does not support the narrative.