Am I Misunderstanding the Wage Budget

[Mackrel829]

I always interpreted the wage budget figure as the total amount of excess money you have available to spend on wages. Is this correct? Or is the figure the amount of money that you currently have allocated to wages on a weekly basis?

For example, if I have £100k as my wage budget, but my total player wages per week are £200k, do I have £300k in total to spend on wages or am I losing £100k per week?

Also, if I set the wage budget higher than my total wages, will I start seeing profits in the finances tabs because I have a surplus on my wage budget?

[Mackrel829]

Any advice?

[PhillyPhanatic14]

It's your excess transfer budget that is allocated towards wages. So you've got the money you can use to buy a player (transfer budget) and then you've got the wages that you use to sign that player. It has nothing to do with the wages currently on the books for players under contract on your squad.

Best way to understand it is: If you have 8mill transfer budget & 100K wages then you can give Man U up to 8mill for Brandon Williams and then you'll have 100K that you can use to sign him. All of that money is technically the same money, but the wage budget is divided out by the 52 weeks since players are paid weekly.

[Mackrel829]

Quote: Originally Posted by PhillyPhanatic14

It's your excess transfer budget that is allocated towards wages. So you've got the money you can use to buy a player (transfer budget) and then you've got the wages that you use to sign that player. It has nothing to do with the wages currently on the books for players under contract on your squad. Best way to understand it is: If you have 8mill transfer budget & 100K wages then you can give Man U up to 8mill for Brandon Williams and then you'll have 100K that you can use to sign him. All of that money is technically the same money, but the wage budget is divided out by the 52 weeks since players are paid weekly.

This makes sense. I guess it's just easiest to think of it as one big pot. Thanks!