The Mail Bag
In Profit
Comments (40)
We sold Johnson and McFadden for £18 Million nearly and bought Fellaini and Pienaar for £17 Million.
Then the Sky money: £40 Million, finishing 5th: £12 million and Carling Cup and Uefa Cup runs about £2.5 million ? plus all the other add-ons like sponsorships, early season ticket sales and shirts... Were is all the money???
Can anyone tell me?
Gary Davis, Posted 20/11/2008 at 10:40:22
Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
Michael Kenrick
I think the shareholders are due an Annual Report of the accounts of Everton Football Club Co Ltd sometime soon... ahead of the Annual General Meeting ? the date for which should be announced in the next few weeks.
Then you shall have your answer!
*cough* Wyness’s hush money pay-off *cough*
Interest payments on the gazillion mortagages that BK has burdened us with, bonuses and sigining on fees for the ?world class? players we have signed, a few million on lobbying for the move to Kirkby and so much money you just cant comprehend it to stop Goodison from falling apart... Oh and that new world class training ground that is so good I still haven't seen any decent pictures of it.
I suspect its been used to service the various loans the club has.
http://www.evertonfc.com/match/finch-farm.html?page=0
Didn’t you know Bill & Moyesy are splitting it up between themselves, Everton are in fact the only club in world were all the players & staff work for free and all the ground maintainance is done by magic elves in the middle of night while we’re all asleep.
Thank you, Barry Lightfoot.
I don?t think Everton is the best-run club in business and are not really trying to defend the board, but these ridiculous calculations where all kinds of costs are forgotten always make me feel itchy. "We sold this and that player, and didn?t buy Manny, so there?s a gazillion lying around in BK?s office!!!".
I don?t think Everton is the best-run club in business and are not really trying to defend the board, but these ridiculous calculations where all kinds of costs are forgotten always make me feel itchy. "We sold this and that player, and didn?t buy Manny, so there?s a gazillion lying around in BK?s office!!!".
The money is in the same place it is at every club, in the players' and agents' pockets.
Players' wages pretty much negate the revenue gained by nearly all clubs today, this is no big secret. Let's go with a conservative estimate of the players making an average of 2 million a year. Of our senior squad that would be about £50 Million, but this is a conservative estimate and it is probably far more and does not include any of the academy players we have signed.
Then you have all the wages that must be paid to all the staff who work for Everton, all those who work at the games, all the vendors of the food, drink, merchandise, fees paid to players' agents when they sign, maintenance of Goodison Park, travel expenses, and on and on. It?s not a money making business, for any club let alone ours. This is why clubs like United and Chelsea get huge payouts for winning the league and Champions League and still lose £100 Million a year due in large part to players wages.
David Barks... whilst I don?t disagree with your logic that the money goes to the players... at least a large part, you?re calculations must be way off. We do not have 25 players earning £40k a week. If we did, we might have better strength in depth than Tony Hibbert.
This is simple: the debts that we borrow get swallowed back up plus interest which leaves the club with FA.
One word - wages
If only life was so simple eh?
Me or you could in no way get anywhere near to where our money gets spent. Equally we have no idea of the amount of costs associated with running a Premier League football club and nobody who posts will be able to either.
Me or you could in no way get anywhere near to where our money gets spent. Equally we have no idea of the amount of costs associated with running a Premier League football club and nobody who posts will be able to either.
Eric Dols is right,
Lehman figures for the Lehman?
The Manny money was used to pay the electic bill and the road sweepers to clean all the horse shit around the ground.
Lehman figures for the Lehman?
The Manny money was used to pay the electic bill and the road sweepers to clean all the horse shit around the ground.
For god?s sake people, there is nothing more frustrating than the incorrect use of where and were and their and there. I thought gramatically incorrect submissions were rejected! argh! Sorry To Michael and all not a dig as I realise how hard it must be to run this site, but please, please can people make some kind of effort when submitting their comments!
To quote the financial genius that is Keith Wyness "All the money goes on the car’s in the player’s carpark". Having witnessed Phil Neville and Andy Johnson, and the mercurial Marcus Bent all driving Bentley’s it would be hard to argue that wages even at a Club like Everton renowned for its rigid wage structure is the major drain on Club finances. Given the price of attending football matches in the EPL is becoming prohibitively expensive, the tv deal and the vageries of existing broadcasting right’s and the credit crunch, outside the potential of foreign investment the increasing growth of the premier league is unlikely to remain sustainable
Apart from wages, expenses, interest payments, utilities....
nothing is as simple as X-Y = loadsamoney for transfers
nothing is as simple as X-Y = loadsamoney for transfers
Steve Kay,
-’Grammatically’ has two ’m’s.
-Exclamation marks should be avoided in formal writing.
-You’ve repeated ’is nothing’ twice.
-You have misplaced and missing comma’s
-Your syntax is all over the place.
I couldn’t help it, but those of us who are so pompous as to correct postings on a website, should really get their own house in order first.
-’Grammatically’ has two ’m’s.
-Exclamation marks should be avoided in formal writing.
-You’ve repeated ’is nothing’ twice.
-You have misplaced and missing comma’s
-Your syntax is all over the place.
I couldn’t help it, but those of us who are so pompous as to correct postings on a website, should really get their own house in order first.
Ciaran
So close to a perfect put-down, then you put an apostrophe in the word commas. House, order, in. Maybe there’s a bit of self-deprecation in submitting a deliberate mistake to avoid possible accusations of pomposity? :) Yours fullyfaith.
So close to a perfect put-down, then you put an apostrophe in the word commas. House, order, in. Maybe there’s a bit of self-deprecation in submitting a deliberate mistake to avoid possible accusations of pomposity? :) Yours fullyfaith.
You can’t blame a player for accepting the massive wages on offer, even if you despise their parasitic agents. The inflation in pay (note - I’m not using the word ’earnings’) and transfer fees has been fuelled like the rise in house prices, by people buying what they can’t afford due to the availability of credit. Platini has suggested that this aspect of the game is essentially corrupt - success, and its rewards, being bought by some clubs outbidding the rest for players they actually can’t afford.
EFC are a long way from being "in profit", but compared to the £350m debt of one club I can think of we might be better equipped to survive the burst of the bubble if it really does come.
EFC are a long way from being "in profit", but compared to the £350m debt of one club I can think of we might be better equipped to survive the burst of the bubble if it really does come.
Here are the figure from the last report and accounts:
Turnover £51,412k
Operating expenses £(51,917k)
Player trading £(10,438k)
Profit / (loss) on disposal of players? registrations £4,048k
Profit on disposal of tangible fixed assets £263k
Loss before interest and taxation £(6,632k)
Interest charges £(2,794k)
Loss for 2007 £(9,426k).
Of the operating costs players wages were £34 million before social security costs and the highest paid director (Wyness I guess) received £426,000.
Hope this helps and I would also point out that mainly due to the small squad we have one of the lowest wage bills in the prem. Remember that when you decide whether to boo them or not.
Turnover £51,412k
Operating expenses £(51,917k)
Player trading £(10,438k)
Profit / (loss) on disposal of players? registrations £4,048k
Profit on disposal of tangible fixed assets £263k
Loss before interest and taxation £(6,632k)
Interest charges £(2,794k)
Loss for 2007 £(9,426k).
Of the operating costs players wages were £34 million before social security costs and the highest paid director (Wyness I guess) received £426,000.
Hope this helps and I would also point out that mainly due to the small squad we have one of the lowest wage bills in the prem. Remember that when you decide whether to boo them or not.
I just wanted to add that income is down £7 million on 2006 due to Wyness contracting out the commercial activities which were just about washing their face but nevertheless IMO could have been managed into profit if any of Everton?s management could be arsed.
Could you see Earl subcontracting out any of his operations?
Could you see Earl subcontracting out any of his operations?
This has probably been mentioned above (didn?t read all the responses) but I?m fairly sure that the majority of the money we have borrowed over the last few years or so was secured against future earnings such as TV money and gate receipts.
I love this play-school economics crap about "where?s the money gone". You are assuming that when we received all that money we had a zero bank balance, rather than the huge debt that we actually have.
EFC could never be described as a tight ship, but the reasoning in the original post is naive at best.
I love this play-school economics crap about "where?s the money gone". You are assuming that when we received all that money we had a zero bank balance, rather than the huge debt that we actually have.
EFC could never be described as a tight ship, but the reasoning in the original post is naive at best.
Obviously there are the debts and interest payments, but also there’s DK. I don’t care what the club tell us, there is no such thing as a free lunch and the DK figures have been changed more often than a toddler on prunes. My guess is that it’s been squirrelled away for the Tescodome - simple as.
In some off-shore bank account.
Hope its not in a Icelandic Bank !
In response to the original post, I think the term "watch this space" is appropriate.
I am nervous to post however and have triple checked my spelling and grammar in Microsoft Word first. Should there be any mistakes, I blame ’americanisms’.
Steve Kay - I fear 2 things regards your post: (notice use of colon rather than semi colon) i. You are attacking the Dyslexic community to have such a vigilant angle regards posts spelling and grammar content, and; ii. (please note correct use of semi colon and commar) Your post did not contribute to the subject content of this discussion, and ergo (please not the use of the word ’ergo’, it should be used more in society today) is inadmissable and should be removed by the moderaters.. or is that mderators... damn..
I am nervous to post however and have triple checked my spelling and grammar in Microsoft Word first. Should there be any mistakes, I blame ’americanisms’.
Steve Kay - I fear 2 things regards your post: (notice use of colon rather than semi colon) i. You are attacking the Dyslexic community to have such a vigilant angle regards posts spelling and grammar content, and; ii. (please note correct use of semi colon and commar) Your post did not contribute to the subject content of this discussion, and ergo (please not the use of the word ’ergo’, it should be used more in society today) is inadmissable and should be removed by the moderaters.. or is that mderators... damn..
Danngnabbit.. I forgot the apostrophe in post’s to signify belonging.."You are attacking the Dyslexic community to have such a vigilant angle regards posts spelling and grammar content.." the angle to which you applied to the posts belonged to the posts, hence the need for an apostrophe to represent belonging. I always let myself down...
Ok I hold my hands up, I was a prat! In order to have given myself some solid ground to stand upon before launching my grammatical (notice correct spelling of grammatical this time!) bombardment, I should have at least read through my pathetic attempt at a post first of all! I was actually laughing upon reading the responses, good banter!
Also, in reference to the original topic, I believe as many others that the money received from McFadden and Johnson transfers was used to keep the banks at bay (however, am I correct in believing that we recently took out another £15 million loan?) and for general running costs associated with a football club.
Also, may it be noted that I am sure that the money for both these transfers was not all paid up front, and a hefty percentage will be clause based, therefore it will be (hopefully) dripping into our accounts over the coming seasons!
Thanks for your concern, people, regarding protection of the Queen’s English, as she is wrote. I share Steve Kay’s affliction regarding incorrect grammar, and tend to correct same when scanning posts and comments for moderation purposes. However, there may be some delay in the process and I would suggest you should ignore such errors in the knowledge that they will probably be fixed. Instead, resolve to redouble your own efforts at grammatical and typographic perfection (it’s not easy) and you will be helping all of us understand exactly what it is you are providing by way of enlightenment.
Andy Van Der Meyde’s medical bills?
In response to Everton paying shitty wages funnily enough Blue Bill has a reputation for paying some of the shittiest wages in the West End.
ps: I hope I spelt shitty ok.
ps: I hope I spelt shitty ok.
Andy van der Meyde?s ?habits??
I also share Michael & Steve’s standpoint when it comes to grammar and spelling. I have been accused of being a ’grammar Nazi’ in the past, but that is beside the point.
I realise this is probably against all of Toffeeweb’s bylaws, but is that the same Steve Kay who was an integral member of the EFCSCSA back in the day?
If so, get in touch so we can invoice you for outstanding fees for the last 10 years or so. (Joking!)
I realise this is probably against all of Toffeeweb’s bylaws, but is that the same Steve Kay who was an integral member of the EFCSCSA back in the day?
If so, get in touch so we can invoice you for outstanding fees for the last 10 years or so. (Joking!)
Steve - completely agree, and my posts were meant in jest nothing more. A bit of light hearted banter and a healthy dose of punctuation makes for a nice distraction from things like public enquiries and only one home win all season!
Unfortunately, it?s not as simple as ?we got £5m for Faddy so our bank balance increases by £5m?. The money for all transfers in & out is structured in installments, & performance related money ? for example, a shot at what we?d get for Faddy?s £5m:
£1.5m up front
£2m in annual installments over 2 years
£0.5m if/when Brum get promoted
£0.25m if Faddy scores more than 15 goals a season
£0.25m for every 10 Scotland caps etc
Whilst accountants can use some of this on the balance sheet, & the club, if the financial climate is ok, can use this money to borrow in order to fund other transfers. In the current financial climate with rumours of clubs going down the toilet financially speaking, this can cause problems in a few ways.
1) If we are known not to be secure financially, a club will want more money from us up front than in installments, as they will not be able to use that income as security for further borrowing themselves to fund their own purchases.
2) So transfers take longer to deal with as more money has to be paid up front otherwise the whole system of securitised football club debt seizes up, due to the lack of trust in clubs finances.
As a club whose finances aren?t good at all, you can hopefully see where the problems lie.
On the plus side, we may be in trouble, but the shite are going to be completely fucked when they can?t refinance their RBS loans in a few months time...
£1.5m up front
£2m in annual installments over 2 years
£0.5m if/when Brum get promoted
£0.25m if Faddy scores more than 15 goals a season
£0.25m for every 10 Scotland caps etc
Whilst accountants can use some of this on the balance sheet, & the club, if the financial climate is ok, can use this money to borrow in order to fund other transfers. In the current financial climate with rumours of clubs going down the toilet financially speaking, this can cause problems in a few ways.
1) If we are known not to be secure financially, a club will want more money from us up front than in installments, as they will not be able to use that income as security for further borrowing themselves to fund their own purchases.
2) So transfers take longer to deal with as more money has to be paid up front otherwise the whole system of securitised football club debt seizes up, due to the lack of trust in clubs finances.
As a club whose finances aren?t good at all, you can hopefully see where the problems lie.
On the plus side, we may be in trouble, but the shite are going to be completely fucked when they can?t refinance their RBS loans in a few months time...
Something to cheer us all up of a Friday:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dzhMLwCmzsc&NR=1
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dzhMLwCmzsc&NR=1
Ben,
Considering we structure our own deals in the same way that you suggest we receive money, then effectively there is no difference..
Therefore for clarity, perhaps ignoring the complexities of the deals is the best approach... because to do it any other way is to waste time on irrelevancy.
Considering we structure our own deals in the same way that you suggest we receive money, then effectively there is no difference..
Therefore for clarity, perhaps ignoring the complexities of the deals is the best approach... because to do it any other way is to waste time on irrelevancy.
Ciaran
You?re absolutely spot on but the question is are we clever enough in negotiations given the paucity of time that BK spends on club business and the ex-Chief Exec?s dubious CV?
I think the only way we can look at it is what the report and accounts show. If we look at the figures from the 2007 accounts above, we can see a spend of £10.4 million on players with £4 million coming the other way.
You?re absolutely spot on but the question is are we clever enough in negotiations given the paucity of time that BK spends on club business and the ex-Chief Exec?s dubious CV?
I think the only way we can look at it is what the report and accounts show. If we look at the figures from the 2007 accounts above, we can see a spend of £10.4 million on players with £4 million coming the other way.
To the truly retentive out there and as the club were amusingly "unaware" of how much Desperation Kirkby had cost them in "consultancy fees" request the information under the freedom of information act and then wait to see if it appears in the annual accounts and how it is listed. The club?s considerable and growing debts seem to be serviced by a reliance on next season?s Sky money not the current season a precarious situation that I am sure many other clubs are in. Unfortunately if the last few months have shown the whole world nothing else then it is that the risk attached to loans is far more tenuous than it ever was.
Jay
There was something like £8-9 million reduction in turnover when catering & merchandising was outsourced. These activities did not make money and they now make a little over £1 million a year for merchandising alone.
Turnover is used as a figure to estimate the overall wealth of a club by Deloitte when giving a guide of the amount of money flowing in and out of the club ? this is the figure that the media publicise every year.
However, the measure of the true worth of the business year on year (i.e. how much money we have to spend in the next fiscal year) is profit rather than turnover, and the outsourcing has improved that figure.
Our publicised ?headline? value thus dropped BUT the true value of the business rose ? paradoxically we fell out of the top 20 of the ?world rankings of rich clubs? while at the same time getting richer!
The merchandising contract runs out this summer so expect to see improvements in terms from whoever is contracted to carry on ? or possibly the club taking the business back ?in house?.
Where has the money gone? £38.4 million in wages 2006-07 with a total staff numbering 202.
There was something like £8-9 million reduction in turnover when catering & merchandising was outsourced. These activities did not make money and they now make a little over £1 million a year for merchandising alone.
Turnover is used as a figure to estimate the overall wealth of a club by Deloitte when giving a guide of the amount of money flowing in and out of the club ? this is the figure that the media publicise every year.
However, the measure of the true worth of the business year on year (i.e. how much money we have to spend in the next fiscal year) is profit rather than turnover, and the outsourcing has improved that figure.
Our publicised ?headline? value thus dropped BUT the true value of the business rose ? paradoxically we fell out of the top 20 of the ?world rankings of rich clubs? while at the same time getting richer!
The merchandising contract runs out this summer so expect to see improvements in terms from whoever is contracted to carry on ? or possibly the club taking the business back ?in house?.
Where has the money gone? £38.4 million in wages 2006-07 with a total staff numbering 202.
Can?t be bothered to read all of this gumph... based on the original posting. Why do you take such stupidly simplistic view of the world?
We don?t own the players, only their registration. The banks own the players, in reality. We take a loan to buy an player then clear the loan when we sell him. Selling for a profit or a loss affects what is or is not available to re-invest.
If you have no money (like Everton) and you buy a house for £1m with a £1m mortgage, then you have a house and a debt. Then you sell the house for £1m. You then have no house and no debt (NOT £1m in the bank).
Even if you sell at a profit, some of the profit will offset the interest paid on the load for the years you owned the house (player).
We have no idea how these deals are structured (only because no one has ever explained it fully to the fans).
But "we sold player X for £m?s so were is the money" is simplistic, blunt ignorance.
Provide me with a detailed finanacial appraisal of the accounts after the AGM then we may be able to have a debate.
We don?t own the players, only their registration. The banks own the players, in reality. We take a loan to buy an player then clear the loan when we sell him. Selling for a profit or a loss affects what is or is not available to re-invest.
If you have no money (like Everton) and you buy a house for £1m with a £1m mortgage, then you have a house and a debt. Then you sell the house for £1m. You then have no house and no debt (NOT £1m in the bank).
Even if you sell at a profit, some of the profit will offset the interest paid on the load for the years you owned the house (player).
We have no idea how these deals are structured (only because no one has ever explained it fully to the fans).
But "we sold player X for £m?s so were is the money" is simplistic, blunt ignorance.
Provide me with a detailed finanacial appraisal of the accounts after the AGM then we may be able to have a debate.
© ToffeeWeb
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
