“Behind Blue Eyes” – 2014-15 accounts review

Where does this money go?

Whilst a new ground would improve our performance, it is pie in the sky as too is redevelopment of Goodison, not (in my opinion) because it is not feasible, but because owners will not or cannot put their hands in their pockets.

Personally, I have a lot of time for Kenwright and the way the club is run. They have a lot but I just can't fathom why we have not been sold. I can only conclude that the reason is that we have not truly been for sale. For that reason, and lack of clarity from the board, I concur wholeheartedly with the protests.

What's to say? Thank God for the EPL's popularity? English as a second or third language everywhere? Yep, Kenwright's signing Moyes. Who knew?

Anything else, anyone? Any other possible way to congratulate or thank the controlling shareholders? I'm open here.

This is a sad state of affairs and complete lack of vision which does not bode well for the future and also highlighted that our current owners are happy NOT to try and go to the next level!!

I would now more than ever like to see this lot vacate the building fast.

What I didn't expect was rise in Other Operating Costs, why do we need to loan 㾿 million each of the last two seasons?

To quote the article 'especially as this cost category has shot up by 40% (٧ million) in the last two years without any substantial explanation.'

Adding: 'an annual loan of 㾿 million renewable every August, securitised on Premier League TV money, at a stonking 8.2% interest rate.'

The article also quotes 'the Vibrac loan was repaid in August, but has been replaced by another loan with the equally mysterious James Grant (JG) Funding.'

What's that about? If anyone can answer me that, I'd be delighted.

A mate took me to the Emirates last night and what a crap experience that was. The design just doesn't suit the game. The circular rings of seats don't work, as the middle ring is all twats in hospitality who destroy any atmosphere. Arsenal 'fans' no longer have any chants apart from the old Clock End/North Bank thing... which they now stick Highbury on the end... so "Clock End Highbury/North Bank Highbury"...cos at least Highbury had some cred. Apart from that, it was like going to the cinema.

Not that Evertonians would necessarily do this... but then they all fuck off before the end of the game. I'm not kidding, the place was empty with 5 mins to go.

The soul of that club was left at Highbury.

It was food for thought....

Does it work like this... without prejudice... in theory... hypothetically... year dot; there you go Bill, 㾿M...@8.2%. It might be payed monthly or annually, let's say annually.

㾿M in £20.58M out... automatic roll over each year, every year. Nice little pension for his kids via Vibrac and when ever it ends, if it ever does.

Should the worst happen – heaven forbid; the loan will end (?) and the 㾿M will STILL go to Vibrac free of death duties... luverly jubberly.

For example, I see from the official site that we paid ٣.7m in players' agent fees in the previous year to Sept 2014, so with contract extensions and the few signings we made, that could be something similar or higher again:

Player's insurance, Public Liability Insurance, medical expenses, maintenance incl painting and cleaning etc at Goodison and Finch Farm, travel expenses, hotels, training camps, match day policing, lawn mowers, electricity, rates, diesel for the team bus, printing matchday programmes, hospitality for visiting teams and dignitaries including the bottle of vino for visiting managers would be my guess to make up part of Other Operating Costs.

I'm sure you are correct that the 'other operating costs' will be legitimate business costs; however, as was noted by Michael (7) earlier in the thread: To quote the article 'especially as this cost category has shot up by 40% (£9 million) in the last two years without any substantial explanation.'

£9m is not an insignificant amount of money and I would have thought that financial fair-play rules would want every club to declare agents' fees, players' bonuses etc in a transparent a way as possible – not all lumped together under a one-size-fits-all category.

I think the whole 'Other Operating Costs' goes back to when Bill was asked about them and he didn't have a fucking clue.

This then has become legend and there is a point of view that this is somehow a vehicle for nefarious activity.

For reference, in the last accounts I looked at, Man Utd was £80m, Tottenham was £40m.

Yes.

What's sad to see is that everyone's prediction that the increased Sky money would simply translate to increased wages has come true. There seems little gain for the club (or any other team) from the Sky money as so much of it just goes to the players.

The wage increase in the numbers doesn't even include any deals done after May. Transfer fees are just a merrygoround: Club A pays Club B who pay Club C etc (obviously with larger fees to agents sucking some of it out).

We tread water whilst we make the odd profit from player sales. Until the stadium elephant in the room is finally sorted out, we're just hoping we avoid relegation every season.

The report is excellent and well worth the trawl. I have added the bookmark to my favourites for future reference. Some good charts comparing our figures with other clubs. As I got further enthused, I compared some others and found Villa 24%, Newcastle 18%, Chelsea 24% and Liverpool 26%, so we are in the same ballpark.

Hopefully Bill will recover good health and make it next year's AGM and be able to have a stab at the 'Operating Costs' question/conundrum.

What I do know is that England is the chosen destination world-wide for every leech to suck the life-blood out of our football to feather their own nest, and all at the stupendous personal cost of fans who receive mere lip-service, at best, from clubs for their commitment... life-long as it is for most of us.

Someone, and it ain't the fans, is laughing all the way to the bank with these EFC accounts.

Evidently, the player wages are increasing in-line with increased TV income. Thus, it becomes even more important to remove deadwood players (by any means) from the wage bill to maximise efficiency in the player wage costs...

Just saying...

"There are basically two elements to Everton’s debt: (a) 25-year loan of 㿁 million, which bears a high interest rate of 7.79%, leading to annual payments of ٠.8 million; (b) an annual loan of 㾿 million renewable every August, securitised on Premier League TV money, at a stonking 8.2% interest rate."

How did we get an annual payment of £2.8mill for the first loan, and why do Everton have to loan so much every year? I assume that, without broadcasting money, the club doesn't have the cash for everyday life and weekly paychecks, or is it something else (that has been mention in comments already)?

I think it is primarily to sustain cash-flow, as you suggest. Given that most players are paid for by installments, it includes the cost of buying players.

On the one hand, it provides much needed cash to keep the operation liquid, and allows us to go about our business in the Premier League.

On the other hand, it invokes substantial sunk costs in terms of interest payments that have to come straight off the bottom line. Another factor is (or was) that these were the only loans we could get at the time. The banks, which might have provided a cheaper line of credit, looked at those risks and said "No".

Michael (#25), in an age where banks are given free money to provide loans and guaranteed (within limits) high income from telly rights for clubs reducing their risks, we have been reducing our overdraft with our mainstream bank in favour of hight interest loans from BVI.