He may do well in the premiership but he would need time to adjust. Jay Rodriguez was scoring over 20 a season for Burnley, but is now struggling for Southampton. Given the very grim financial news we've had today, we need to shift the deadwood, such as Gueye Heitinga (sadly) and Naismith (yes Naismith) before we can do anything.

Without sounding dramatic for th first time in 35 years of supporting Everton, our finances and the antiquated heap stadium are a noose round our necks. Kenwright has a lot to answer for!

The problem is, Joe, Kenwright does not give two fucks and will only answer what he wants people to hear.

The lads a top player in the Championship if not the best player, But the question is can he hack the Premiership?He's got a lot of pace and is seriously deadly in the 18 yard box. Jelavic took the step up so could Austin?

Joe,

The finances aren't a disaster. While not good, we have a guaranteed large increase in TV money coming for next season. And if we can continue to fight at the top of the table an increase in payment for league placement as well as European qualification. And we just signed Naismith, he's going nowhere.

Joe... as David says, we are not in that bad of a financial situation but I agree we can't go on like this for the foreseeable future as Moyes can only do so much on a limited to non-existent budget... plus some of the players are not getting any younger.

Naismith I feel has not been that bad of an asset and he puts in a shift. Up until last night, I would have advocated that Jelavic be put on the bench for a few weeks as I didn't believe he was playing that well.

Let's hope major investment will come quick. Can't understand why not as we have the history and the following...

Austin wouldn't be cheap so I think that's us out of the equation!

I would also rather we spent our money on a striker abroad where the money goes further. I bet we could pick up a top goalscorer from Belgium, Holland, France or Germany for less than what Austin would cost. (Rodriguez was £7m I think so he would be at least that).

Well said, David,

I actually think that the club has been run very well over the last year or so, regardless of what the figures say. You have to speculate to accumulate and we have done some very good business over the last two transfer windows, which has made us very competitive at the top end of the league, with a chance of a top 4 finish this year.

Even if we don't qualify for the Champions League, I would certainly back us for European qualification. We are definitely going to get more TV appearances this season and season tickets and attendances are up significantly from last year. I suspect that the finances will much healthier this time next year.

Toffeeweb record for changing the subject of a thread to finances in only 2 comments. Well done, lads.

Finances, if I understand correctly, were for the 2011-12 season. We were shite the first half of last season. Season tickets are up this year and we have the TV deal coming so I'm not too concerned. We could break even this year. Next year, if we make Champions League, we could even be profitable.

Charlie Austin has some interesting habits if you Google...

In term of Everton being well managed, I assume you have been out with Charlie. The new TV deal has dug Everton out of a hole, with last years loss excluding player trading of £10.5m despite a tiny squad. Or would have needed Champions League every other season to stop having to sell any remaining assets to stay a float without denting the debt.

David Barks, Christopher De Costa,

Oh dear... and people wonder why some of us worry about how easy it is to fool some of the people all of the time. The finances aren't a disaster — I actually think that the club has been run very well over the last year or so, regardless of what the figures say...

So Well done Bill, Hey?? God Help Us.

Right on, Steve.

Why do do some of our fans think qualification for the Europa League equals financial success? It's Champions League or bust.

It probably cost more in expenses to play Europa than you actually earn in revenue.

Tony, Totally agree!

Better finishing out of Europe than in the Europa.

Playing Thursday & Sunday is the pits.

Funny how our neighbours don't suffer from lack of TV appearances isn't it? I mean they must have 75% of their games televised (not including Europa), isn't there a rule as to how many times any given team can appear, if there isn't there should be.

Tony Marsh is spot on: it's Champions League or bust these days. The Europa L0eague is a complete waste of time. I read the year we got knocked out by Fiorentina, despite us winning all our group games, we made £1.1 million in prize money.

All the Europa League does is hamper teams who nearly made it to teh Champions League the year before.

Ian 093... How can it be a waste of time? You've got prize money and then the revenue from the home games... a good chance of progressing to the Final, à la Fulham, and it would help keep any of our players who aspire to play in Europe...

Plus you telling me you would pass up a potential European competition final ticket if we got there.... No, didn't think so!

Tony and Ian, I have personally spoken to the club about this, and the view was exactly that,the Europa cup offers loads more games and travel and potential injuries, but only limited reward unless you win it. That said I understood it that the format is about to change so maybe that will be addressed, or I am talking nonesense

Ian

Graham 096 I appreciate what you say and yes id love a trip to a european game let alone final. I'm talking financially and financially its a waste of time.

If you have a look at the revenue from home games its not much add that to low tv revenues and less attendances on a sunday compared to a saturday and I don't think its worth it........just my opinion though.

Ian 098 I have can only say what I read in the papers. I read about Fulham's trip to the final and the small amount of prize money they received around £3 million I think don't quote me on that. If you add that to the games being arranged for Sunday, the travel on Thursdays, the extra games I just don't think its beneficial to Everton especially with a small squad.

Ian, your posts demonstrate the dilemma, we would all love a day or two somewhere hot, a nice new stadium and winning a trophy abroad, on the other side of the coin, your later post well describes the other side of the coin, personally, I dislike Sunday afternoon games in particular. Which leads me to conclude, yes, CL or bust. In that land, qualification to the group stages is a license to print money, so sad we missed out last time.

Hold up, I did not say the finances are in good shape, I simply said they aren't a disaster. To me, a disaster is when things are completely falling apart. When there is a hurricane and thousands of people are left without a home, millions without power, and billions needed for repairs. That's a disaster. I don't believe our finances are a disaster, that's all I said. No need to say I'm being fooled, I completely understand the poor position we are financially.

But we do have a large increase in TV money coming, it's not as if we are going to go broke in the next few months. We're fighting with a realistic chance for the Champions League, that would greatly improve our finances. The Europa Cup was a joke, but it was my understanding that they have continued to increase the money in the new Europa League in order to make clubs take it more seriously. I didn't say it equals financial success, but I do know that finishing high enough in the league to qualify for the Europa League equals more money, and the competition itself does equal more money. That's all I'm saying, along with saying Naismith won't be sold in January as he only just joined us.

But David #114 - the increase in TV money benefits all clubs, and will benefit those that are featured more on TV most.

Whilst it means our operating performance will improve provided we don't go out and increase the wage bill, it means other clubs that are around us and with better organised finances will be able to increase their spending - see Wigan posted a profit for this year.

The irony of ironies is it means the owners get a stay of execution to sit tight and wait for someone to offer silly money - which they won't - so they get to hang on to their personal vanity project.

Matt,

I'm not arguing our spending power relative to other clubs, it has been and will continue to be weak. Wigan may have posted a profit after selling on players recently and not replacing them suitably, but they are also currently sitting 18th in the table and may very well not get as lucky as the past few seasons and be relegated. What will their spending power be then?

We currently sit 3 points off of 3rd and have a fighting chance to get into the Champions League. Nothing is guaranteed but we have a chance. And that combined with the increased TV money we do know will be coming our way to me means our finances are not a disaster. That doesn't mean I think they're good, far from it. But there is no reason to paint me as some deluded optimist who can't see the problems we face (which I know you didn't do).

Holy Smoke! Just watched Odjidja on YouTube. If we need to sell players to get this guy, then please do it NOW. He is absolute mustard. We have to go up a notch and one quality player can can do just that. Ask Sir Alex.

David,
I don't think the increase in TV money is the game changer people think. A proportion of that money will end up in players/agents pockets.

But for me of greater concern is the matchday and commercial revenue. We're far too dependent on broadcast revenue, and as a percentage of our turnover it's too much which means if the arse ever does drop out of the TV market, we'd be more exposed than clubs that have greater matchday and sponsor revenue.

Scudamore said he was pleasantly surprised the last round brought an increase on the domestic deal. I'm sure he was - it went a long way to paying his near £2.5m bonus for the year.

Liverpool's next set of accounts will show their commercial income out-strips our entire turnover. I know they're a bigger brand etc. but their stock is well down.

Our main sponsorship deal is delivering less than half of what it should be doing. I've worked on sponsorship deals for English clubs in Asia and there are teams we would consider peers or of lesser standing pulling in £8-10m for the title sponsorship. It's got fuck all to do with being in London - it's to do with the exposure of the EPL in the overseas TV markets.

Other clubs have representative offices in places like Singapore, Hong Kong and the US. They actively engage with marketing agencies to go out and line up deals. I used to get asked by companies to "get us into Man Utd", and when they'd find out how much it cost, and we provided TV data and crunched some numbers, clubs like Everton become a much better proposition in turns of return on marketing investment.

So why are we getting less than £4m a year from Thai Beverage (who are a great company BTW, and have really leveraged on the Everton association in Asia in the past, but in my opinion that deal has run its course)?

There's plenty of opportunity out there but under this rudderless board who'd rather take a deal offering some money up front over long term gain, we'll never capitalise on it.

But as I've said before, our piss-poor commercial income will actually make us more attractive to buyers, because straight away they'll see room for growth. Low hanging fruit and all that.

Matt,

I'm really not wanting to get into a big long debate about everything because it has been discussed for years and nothing has really changed. I don't really disagree with you on anything that you said. I don't think the TV money is a game changer, never said I did. Simply stating that the current finances as they are, with that increase of money coming in, does not in my mind represent a disaster.

Of course I don't think it represents anything good at all, changes are needed. That's all, I just didn't like being called foolish and someone stating that I think all is good in the world of Everton, because I said nothing of the sort. But look, if the bottom dropped out of the TV revenue, everyone would be screwed to be honest.

David #124, I agree that if the arse dropped out of the market everyone would be screwed, but my point is that with 3 main sources of income - broadcast, matchday and commercial, we are too heavily dependent on broadcast with respect to the other income streams - more so than a lot of other clubs, therefore if the broadcast market did fall, the impact on us would be felt harder than other clubs.

The fact remains we are still a sell-to-buy club, but worse than that we are an occasionally have-to-sell-anyway club. I don't think that's gonna change too much post introduction of the new deal.

"The finances aren't a disaster"

They're a lot worse than last year when we were lead to believe by the Club spin machine that things were hunky dory and were only going to get better.

We've been lied to again, and the lies continue this year.

Eric,

Again, yes they are worse than last year. We bought a bunch of players and signed others to contract extensions, so the wage bill increased. But I repeat, they aren't a disaster. Why does saying they're not a disaster somehow require a counter argument about how bad they are, as if I'm saying they're good. That's not what I'm saying. I'm simply saying that in my opinion a disaster would be the word to use the likes of Portsmouth, when it is actually a disaster. Chaos, can't pay the bills, can't pay the players, club going under. That would be when I would use disaster.

Right now I would say the finances continue to be poor and require a buyer, and continued pressure to get the current ownership to sell. In the immediate term we have a strong squad that has a chance to get into the Champions League, which would help the finances in the short term. We also know we will be getting an extra 20 million from TV money next year, which will help the finances in the immediate term. It's not a fix, but that's my reasoning for saying it's not a disaster. That's not the same as saying it's all rosy and good which for some reason people want to automatically jump to. Like Michael Kenrick likes to throw out, I think I'm just being realistic. Not an optimist, just not automatically jumping off a bridge with where we currently are.

OK, So I take it no-one wants Charlie Austin.

I must admit his habits do sound dodgy. Thanks Ian.

David, we have short term debt of £57m that is due before the end of April, how much of a dent in that will the £20m make?

We bought a bunch of players for £12+m after selling a bunch for £23+m, a net of £10.5m which would have made the loss £19+m.

We are continually being lied to by the Club who say eveything is under control and is going to get better but each year the debt gets bigger and we continually have to sell assets to pay the banks something.

Last year £5m loss was acceptable, this year £9m, how much loss is going to be so great to make some fans realise that the Club is NOT being run properly? Only when we are in the Portsmouth situation you describe?

Personally I want to avoid that sort of disaster so recognising the trend early on and taking action to prevent it is imperative but this board only offer platitudes and bullsh!t which some fans seem happy with.

Eric,

What in the hell are you not understanding about my position? No, I do not believe we are doing a Portsmouth, so no I do not think it's a disaster. We do not have to pay off £57 million in debt this year. We have debt, it's not all due in April. Stop trying to make out a straw man argument about me backing this fucking board. Enough. I'm not saying I'm happy with how the club is being run or the financial position we are in. I wish the club was sold yesterday. But I am also understanding that we are not on the brink of going under, which you seem to be proposing by saying we have to pay off all our debt in April.

Last year was a bad year. There was justified fan dissatisfaction causing gate receipts to decline which hurt concessions and merchandise sales. We didn't get into Europe which hurt finances. Our wage bill increased. All I am saying is that this year has seen more attendance as we have a better team. We are much higher in the table at this time of the year and have a real shot to get into Europe, which would greatly help. We also have an increase in TV money coming to us. That is all I'm saying. It is horrible to lose £9 million in one year and I want the club sold ASAP. What more can I say?

David, see that line in the accounts

Creditors: amounts falling due within one year -57,166,000?

Within 1 year is from when the accounts were made, end of April 2011. That means we have to pay off £57 million in debt by April 2012.

And that's not all the debt, see the next line down showing the amount falling due after 1 year of £27+m?

Net liabilities are now the worse ever with an increase of £10m over last year, the previous worse ever. Things are not getting better despite how much spin the Club put on it.

We've had about 3,000 per home game better average attendance than last season, how much is that worth? Not a lot, it won't cover the '£9m cash loss', not counting the increased players wages over the last year, and we won't be getting the TV money all in one go, but spread over the course of the season, same as now. Besides which the Club will have to borrow against that.

We may not be a disaster of the Portsmouth proportions which you seem to regard as a benchmark but a disaster is still a disaster, especially so for those affected.

Eric – to be fair most of that will be renegotiated as a new facility, with the amount probably stable or perhaps increasing with the new tv deal.

The issue will be stemming the operating loss excluding player trading and the interest on the debt. This will be met by an increase in revenue, hopefully from gate receipts (although big discounts on kids tickets is hiding the real current attendance), and big gulp, the sale of players. This is probably why we repeatedly see Baines for £15m, Jags for £10m. Clubs trying it on, as they know Everton are going to have cash in sooner or later.

Totally agree with Marshy. If it has to be Europa, I'd treat it like the useless Capital One Cup and play the kids. The only perk from qualifying is the extra Prem place payment!

Agree that the Europa has very little financial reward compared to Champions League but it still has some and they are looking at trying to even it up a bit.

Yes, it's tough on the squad to be playing the extra games in Europa but surely it can't be a bad thing to be playing in Europe and getting more global exposure? There are lots of great teams that have played in the Europa in the last few seasons and I for one would love to see a team like AC milan or Athletic Madrid coming to Goodison Park.

A good run next season in the Europa might provide £5-7m profit in TV, gate receipts and prize money and that would be enough to buy another Mirallas or Jelavic. Surely this is something we should be positive about?

I agree that we might use it as a chance to try out some more fringe players but surely if we do get into Europe that should be something to be pleased about.

I always imagine David Barks with a big red face and steam coming out of his ears sat at his PC.

Always a lot of anger in your posts, Dave...

It seems that Everton are using Payday Loans, you know like the ones on TV: Money in your bank account in 15 mins, Borrow £100 pay back £125 in one month.

Seven or so years ago, our Debt was £20M, now it is £46M. But with no Assets now. This despite all the TV money coming in. Sometime soon someone is not going to lend that extra money to payback the payday loan. Or am I being too simplistic??

ps: David, where did the money for Bellefield go???

Charlie Austin is not very good. My Dad is a Burnley fan, I keep an eye on them and I've watched them play once this season.

He's nowhere near the ability of Jay Rodriguez, and he's done very little in the Premier League.

Ian, the amount due within 1 year may well be renogotiated but it still won't go away, it just moves to the 'debt to be repaid after 1 year' column, while some of that debt moves into the immediate repayment column and the total debt remains the same unless it is paid down by the sale of assets.

This is where the net debt figure is misleading and is often quoted as being our total debt as in "we're in debt to the tune of £46m which can be covered by the sale of a couple of players" but we have creditors who we owe money to, to the tune of £85m according to the accounts.

MM, so now Blue Bill has racked up Debts / Loans / Creditors totaling £85M and the purchase price has been misquoted as being in the region of £120/£150M. And people wonder why we have not been sold...

But hey — Moyes is doing a great job, we are chasing a CL place, so Bill and the Board must be doing something right, hey?

YOU THINK???

As I have said before, God Help Us.

How about "a disaster waiting to happen"?

To answer the original question Charlie Austin is a great prospect but this usually means the current club will want some ridiculous amount for him making it a much bigger risk and therefore unlikely to happen. Whatever rose tinted slant you want to put on it a 9 million loss is a tragedy. My rather simplistic attitude would ask why certain board members / share holders who are sitting on vast personal fortunes who could pay off the debt or make an interest free loan, or at least a cash injection, without really even denting their cash pile, don't. If you are purely in it for the money then run it as a proper business and get someone who knows what they are doing, if you are in it for the love of the club then put your money where your mouth is, and then get someone in who knows what they are doing.

Criticism of the Europa is a little harsh. I, for one, enjoyed the night matches at Goodison and with plans, apparently, to increase financial rewards to clubs in that competition and in order to raise it's profile from the "also rans" it may be a better prospect than some are suggesting on here. I would like UEFA to prevent the clubs who enter the CL, but fail to progress in that competition, from dropping down into the Europa League. That, more than anything, diminishes it's standing but still allows the so-called bigger clubs to continue trawling for money. Bastards.

Vadis is on the cheap because he's prone to gaining weight & has also fallen out with his last 2 managers, I have watched him on them dodgy streaming sites & he does look the part. Never watch a YouTube video to make up your mind, Bily & Bebe looked world class too remember!

I love how the tangents develop here lads, fair play. This thread quickly became about the financial plight of our club rather than the player in question, which then led to a wish list of targets based on 'the money we'll get next season'.

Let's get serious, guys: while the club operates at a loss, we are not the worst run club in the country. Far from it. Despite what rumours you believe, we are NOT on the brink of going under, which a lot of clubs are. The only reason our finances are scrutinised heavily when compared to us is our lack of opportunity to generate funds, which let's be fair, bar City and Chelsea, other clubs do by amassing massive amounts of debt, again which gets looked over on the basis of them signing players for ridiculous fees.

Look, our club needs investment, we want a new ground, which will face opposition from wherever we want to go from various fans and groups. Until that oligarch / rich sheikh / gay couple arrive in town in their pink limo, we go with what we got and operate the club as best we can... which I think we're doing to the 'best' (loose term) of our ability.

Charlie Austin... there's better value out there!!!

I didn't realise we'd become business fans rather than football fans. Not bothering playing in the Europa league because it doesn't give us much cash?! What about those trips to Nuremburg, Fiorentina, Lisbon, the European experience it gave our team, raising our profile across the continent, the great games we saw at Goodison and a chance to win a trophy. I couldn't give on how much or not we get from it, if it means more games that I can watch Everton in then so be it.

Of course I'd prefer the champions league, but failing this I'd rather watch Everton in European football than not just because it upsets the bean counters. Although its been lost amongst this motd/sky generation, the experience of going to the games as a group of fans is just as important as the end result. Just because you don't win a competition or don't get a load of money from it doesn't mean that its value for the fans is completely diminished.

What's the point of us turning up for league games? We're never going to win it so why bother? Because at some basic level we like football regardless of the result, its a shared experience that is equally valuable whether its a win or loss.

James Martin - couldn't agree more. Also if we don't qualify for CL its the place to gain european experience so we have a better chance of qualifying/progressing if/when we do qualify - especially as 4th place will set up another villereal type tie before we can get to the gravy train

Surely the debt includes wages of players we no longer have.
Our wage bill must have come down as we have lost Arteta, Yakubu, Cahill, Beckford, Rodwell etc.
We have also discarded MacFadden, Hahnemann etc.

We have taken on less players than we let go and none of them are on the wages of either Arteta or Cahill.

Sometimes I think that stats are produced to fool people and can be either positive or negative accordingly.

I would like to see a month by month wages bill including the time when we employed Arteta, Cahill, Yakubu etc....and another set of figures based on our present wage bill.
I would be totally astonished if we are paying more for the players we currently have.

Trevor - The accounts are 1/6/11 to 31/5/12, so most of the players you list will have gone by 31/8/11. Rodwell will be a full yr, Jelavic since 31/1/12.

Charlie Austin makes Kevin Kilbane look like Usain Bolt. No way would he cut it in the PL.

The problem with Austin is he is not going to come cheap and we can't afford to spend money on a player who may or may not cut it in the prem.

It's funny you should say that Mike. I keep in touch with a lad we met on holiday a few years ago who is a Burnley fan and he said Rodriguez is a far better player.

Christopher de Costa @029

There is a an African chap who needs an investor willing to put a large amount of money his way in return for a share in his uncle's, who happens to be a prince, fortune.

Would you like his contact details?

Point taken Paul. Didn't know "Odd Job" had a weight problem. Maybe thats why he falls out with managers. Yes. Videos only show the good bits but the lad really is very talented and has represented Belgium at every level from schoolboy upwards.

Bily needed to play in and around the box but was never given the chance. If only Ossie or Pienaar had his explosive shooting power.

Every single club will be seeking to improve their squad and promising prospects are not likely to put us up a notch. Mr Moyes is well aware of this and I'm sure he has a surprise or two up his sleeve.

its possible this could be another Van Der Meyde. Could be trouble with the Charlie

I would put in a bid for Knockeart ( Leicester winger) before he is snatched by Arsenal. 5M possibly, could be another Arteta.

I'm not saying that I think Austin is up to task, and I believe this is a bullshit story, but Rickie Lambert has shown this season, that a slow striker can still cut it in the Premier League...just as likes of Holt and Ashton have also shown. But given his record at the moment, he will cost in the region of 5million, and just won't be worth it. If we are going to invest that much, might as well look at Phillips or Ince. But it is all irrelevant anyway, as I don't see us being able to do more than a couple of loan deals.

Steve Austin may be a better option depending on the dollar to pound exchange rate.

Jim I wouldn't want Rickie Lambert either. Brian, I think any Burnley fan will tell you the same thing, there's a big difference between them.

Austin is basically a sniffer, a poacher, and I also think is having the season of his life.

In fact, he might be worse than Naismith...

I am worried about the 'sniffer' bit, Mike?