Everton publish Annual Report & Accounts for 2023-24

£53.2M over the first 12 months of the last 21 months!

That's right. Managed to bring it down from £89m from the preceding year.

The shite lost £45m!

The Red Shite actually lost £57M.

They were happy to write it off to get round any debt over the threshold.

If you're talking about the loss, then the BBC already have an article on their website. Like flies round fucking shit!

At least it is not an increase on the previous year. Moyes may find it is lucky he can absorb a points deduction, but his comfortable position will go.

What points deduction?

Just Jerome talking utter shite, as usual.

As it says above, and repeated in bold:

Back in January, the Premier League said it would not be charging any clubs for PSR breaches in the 3 years up to and including 2023-24 after all were deemed financially compliant following the submission of accounts before the end of December 2024.

The 10% reduction in overall staff is not uncommon in failing companies, and it's not hard to imagine that it accelerated in the following 6 months until TFG took over. That trend might quickly reverse as TFG gear up operations and the new CEO assumes command.

One particularly ancient number is the net book value of the stadium. £700M? Gotta be far higher now that it's done and in operation.

Thanks. That's what I understood, and it was repeated in today's reports.

Keeping this simple, does this mean we are okay?

I haven't read the small print but I would be a bit surprised if the Auditor's Report comes up with that bit like last time, expressing doubt about the club as a 'going concern'.

Actually, here it is from this set of accounts:

In ensuring that the Group has sufficient liquid resources to meet its liabilities as they fall due the Directors have reviewed in detail the business' cash flow projections. As disclosed in note 1c, the Group's trading projections show that it has a reasonable expectation of staying within its currently available, and future anticipated, finance facilities for at least 12 months from the date of signing of these accounts. In preparing these trading projections, a number of additional inherent uncertainties have been identified; notably on-field performance and the resultant reduction in the Premier League domestic broadcasting merit award payment and the level of player trading.

The Directors have considered other inherent uncertainties and, in the event that they would be required, have identified a number of potential mitigating actions to manage any resulting forecast shortfall against current facilities including the ability within the industry to securitise additional future guaranteed revenues and flexibility around player trading. Based on the mitigating actions referred to above, as well as the financial support of Roundhouse Capital Holdings Limited (UK), a company ultimately controlled by Dan Friedkin, the Directors have a reasonable expectation that the Group will have adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, they adopt the going concern basis in preparing the Annual Report and Accounts.

Here's what the Auditor's Report says:

Based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the group's ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from when the financial statements are authorised for issue.

From Toyotas to movies to golf courses to luxury resorts to ranchland to AS Roma, Dan Friedkin has generated nothing but successful investment results. His fortune has more than doubled since 2020.

The man has never failed at anything. So yeah, I'd say we're good.

The reason I speculate that TFG will increase their labor force is that in a public-facing operation like a football club, nothing generates more ROI than marketing. Friedkin's entire life has been sales, whether it be cars or movie tickets or $1000 hotel rooms. An expanded Everton marketing operation should produce some serious revenues.

It still reflects some pain, positive net player trading, high levels of expensive debt. But there are some positives (wage bill % of turnover falling, and most importantly the Accounts are not qualified by the Auditors as a ‘Going Concern' risk).

It's what has happened since that is important. The restructuring of our debt to sensible commercial rates, so reducing interest payments. The completion of the stadium. The move towards better commercial revenues (kit deal etc).

Everton Football Club is on a far far better financial footing. Best it's been in a long while and hopefully only going to get better now that it is professionally run.

Whilst I'm not expecting a massive player trading splurge this Summer, I am expecting the brakes to come off a bit post June 2025 (as we enter the 2025-26 Financial Year).

Plenty of reasons to be positive.

Our marketing was more like a stall on Garston Market rather than putting us on the global footballing map. I don't know if it's still the case, as I haven't used it for years, but we couldn't even stretch as far away as selling our name and merchandise at our own airport.

The best thing about having Yank owners who know marketing is that I now have actual hopes of that happening.

No clubs actually publish their PSR numbers so I've no idea how close to the £105M allowable 3-year losses we were. The actual losses were £38M in 21-22, £89M in 22-23 and the £53M in 23-24 — totalling £180M!

What worries me is how much headroom, if any, we have to the end of June for this financial year. The losses in 22-23 and 23-24 already total £142M, well over the £105M allowed, so unless this year is a massive turnaround I am still more worried about sales we may have to make to comply with PSR before the end of June.

Hopefully this will be the last year of real PSR pressure but as it is still in place for next season, I can't see a massive summer of buying.

Shows what a financial mess Moshiri left the club in!!

Mike Gaynes (25): the last time you posted that never seen a shirt stuff (and you have done so more than a few times) a few of us posted to say that we have. I listed around eight places where I have seen our stuff on sale and the actual figure is higher. There is also something called Amazon.com.

It might be more accurate next time to say "Unlike some others on here, I have never seen an Everton shirt on sale in a shop in 'merica."

With good marketing 'Garston – the People's Market' could really take off, so even northenders became aware of it.

Cyprus Potatoes Liam. Another place I lived for a couple of years and yes, there is something about them!!

Onana was sold for £50M from a book value of £18M (3/5ths of the £30M paid), so there's £32M trading gain.

This seems to be the case with trading losses being offset by gains on player trading (excluding amortisation). Maupay will be a small book profit as his book value will be less than the £4.6M trigger.

The amortisation charge will be the key bit towards PSR. It was £65M last year, but I'd expect that to narrow with the lower recent spend to the relative folly of Moshiri's recklessness.

I'd suggest we probably don't need to sell Branthwaite to hit the numbers by 30 June, but you could see a need to move on a player with a value in excess of their book cost.

I'd estimate the following book values at 30 June 2025:-
Beto £12.5M,
Mykolenko £5M,
Patterson £4M,
McNeil £6M,
Garner £3-4M,

And any of those could be sold to help achieve PSR. objectives.

I hardly see the point of the value of the stadium now. It's not like we're ever going to sell it. So any value is worthless.

I would not assume that the tariffs will be imposed on 'Liberation Day' Peter (though the unions support tariffs) as Trump has backed down before. And if they are, they might not last for long when Trump's base sees the impact on imported fresh produce (and cars).

Mind you, Trump's base might not be the most obvious buyers of fresh fruit and vegetables, but they like their trucks.

I'm thinking it'll be the following season when we really do have a bit of muscle in spending a bit due to increased commercial activities such as possible naming rights of the stadium, matchday revenue and shirt sponsorship.

I think that's right. Can anyone please confirm?

Friedkin knows it'll be devastating to his business. His dealerships will have to raise prices sharply to cover the costs of the tariffs -- cars are a low-margin business -- and that will instantly drive down new-car sales.

That's across the board, because even US-built cars are dependent on foreign-made parts and technology.

We should see a gain of around £32M on Onana. £50M less his book cost being £18M (3/5ths x £30M we originally paid).

Might be a bit less with some sell-on profit, but probably offset with other bits and bobs picked up on prior sales.

Of course it will be sold someday to new owners, and the rising value of both the facility itself and its impending revenue generation deliver crucial enterprise net worth.

Worthless? Not hardly.

That's correct.

The headline figure contains expenditure on ladies and youth football so these will have to be deducted to arrive at the PSR number.

I wouldn't expect the headline figure to contain any expenditure related to the new stadium.

Not Shite. It just means that when allowable costs are taken into accounts, which they have not been done in these figures, that Everton are closer to being compliant. Though it is a large amount of allowable expenses if correct. I was going by an earlier BBC report. Glad if it is the case that points are not deducted.

At the time in January, I interpreted that Everton had sorted out their previous issues with Premier League's decisions, and were not part of a blanket clearance for all Premier League Clubs as this article suggests. It is only now that figures are available and no final PSR calculations have been shown.

It could be that TFG have come to a agree with the Premier League, which I always thought was a possibility, since they have put substantial monies into a Premier League club.

The Friedkins took over before the close of play for this seasons accounts.

Sir Jim Ratcliffe's INEOS acquired a 25% stake in the club in February 2024, which was one of the mitigating factors. The club were given an allowance of around £35M related to the INEOS share sale.

Isn't the value of players' future wage payments also included in the accounts? So that would make the 'profit' on Onana greater than just the difference between sale and book values?

Paul H #33, the stadium is an asset so it's value will always be included in the accounts.

Coincidence surely?

Now, if EFC were the first ones to do that, would it be looked at in the same way?

I don't think wages are a factor when determining the profit or loss made on the sale of a player.

3rd Term for Trump - aye in Prison, hopefully, sharing a cell with Vance, Netenyauh, Erdogan and his bessie, Putin.

With Klopp involved in said organisation, BMD will probably be referred to by some wags as the Red Bullshit Stadium.

He will get a cut of the transfer or some form of loyalty payment if he's not asked for a move, I'd think, which will reduce the profit.

I'd not included Onana's wages as I expect that this is broadly a wash with wages coming in 2025 for O'Brien, Mangala, Lindstrøm, Broja, Ndiaye, offset by Onana, Godfrey, plus a small period for Iwobi, Gray, and Gbamin in 2024. They are probably lower per person, but we've more bodies to pay for.

But… Klopp and the lettering Red on the stadium? They would have to name it the Blue Bull stadium as part of a marketing twist. We've changed the colour of Heinz Ketchup to blue, so why not?!!

The "Blue Bull" Stadium?

Got some nagging doubts about that name. Can't for the life of me put my finger on it, however?

But none of us are taken in by your AFJ!

It would only take a spelling mistake and before you know it …

You've ruined my bleedin' day just thinking about that spelling mistake!

Our club seriously argued for more COVID, Gylfi's mental health, Ukraine, the fact our players are shit and worth less than they should be, and for interest on a loan that had a big sign on the front saying the opposite of what we claimed it was for. Oh and inflated advance sponsorship payments on a stadium that didn't yet exist.

We needed a lawyer and an accountant. We got Bill's theatre and an accountant who couldn't account.

Good on Chelsea. They're nowhere near as incompetent as our previous leadership.

It's funny though, the bastards.

In the UK, while certain artificial food colorings, including some blue dyes, are approved for use, research suggests they may have a link to hyperactivity in some children, leading to warning labels on products containing them.

The new list also includes a rare intact Second World War radar station, a manor house with interiors spanning 500 years, and an Iron Age cave.

That isn't an April Fool's, even though it is an absolute joke.

Now normally, when any business loses money, it's because of a drop-off in customer sales, but most clubs are playing to nearly full houses every week. So the fact that many are losing money is because they are paying players well more than they can afford.

I see in this post it's saying our costs have gone down from 92% although in this post it doesn't say what it has reduced to.

While no Premier League club has gone into administration, a couple have been close; carry on paying out silly money to players, then it's inevitable that one will go into administration.

I suppose the advantage Everton have is the new stadium will make a massive difference in the amount of matchday revenue, but it would be silly to think we could spend the same as clubs who regularly compete in the top European tournaments.

Garlic Aioli is a blend of garlic and olive oil. Both have natural health benefits, including reducing cholesterol amongst other things.

That and inaccurately mis-naming Everton Stadium repeatedly as ‘Bramley Moore Dock Stadium' shows the indifference and laziness football journos have towards the club.

It was me just correcting and then me getting on my high-horse about food colourings.

Couldn't they find even one Scouser for a part? At least old Etonians, Redmayne and Cumberbatch(?) aren't in it.

I do not know if it has anything to do with the accents because The Beatles cartoon series by Al Brodax said the Americans would not understand the Liverpool accents, so got someone to do their voices.

John's voice sounded like he had attended Eton and went fox hunting at weekends with the ho-rah Henry's was voiced by Paul Frees, who came from Chicago, yet the same film company got two scousers to do Paul's and Ringo's voices in the film Yellow Submarine, actors Paul Angeles and Geoffrey Hughes.

You'd have thought they'd at least tried to fit Stephen Graham in there somewhere. But he's probably even too scouse for the Fab Four.

That's a good claim to fame, Colin, should have said went same school, throw a bit of bullshit in, then said he liked Everton when he was younger but music got in the way, blag a few to get them into Everton.

I messaged McCartney about opening the new stadium and got a reply saying he will get his production team onto it to see if it is possible.

We need to open the ground with a bang.

- the short to medium term focus of TFG will be on financial stability rather than footballing success;

- the transfer kitty will be modest, which is problematic with so many (probable) departures from an already small, weak squad;

- we don't "need" to sell Branthwaite for PSR / solvency reasons – but we might have to in order to fund new signings;

It doesn't sound especially thrilling this, but it is a huge step forward from where we were under Moshiri – with the real risk of relegation, insolvency, and years of obscurity in the lower leagues.

We also have a sensible if unspectacular manager who probably operates most effectively with a small budget, small squad and limited players.

I hope we don't regret Thelwell's departure – so I'll be interested in what (if any) recruitment we do at age 15 to 18 this summer and other plans for the future.

While it might be unpalatable to us fans, unless we cut our cloth accordingly to start with, then it's difficult to see how we ever get to challenge for honours.

Let's not forget: Aston Villa were in the Championship not so long ago… and look where they are now. Bournemouth and Brighton are challenging for European places — both with small fan bases compared to Everton. But these clubs bought well and appointed good managers.

The problem is us fans don't want success tomorrow and some of my age may be lucky to see us win another trophy.
The big advantage we have is the new ground which, with the revenue it produces, should help us to get where we want to be that much quicker.

I attended the first test event and the stadium is something special. I noticed the bars to allow rail safe standing to be used, which the Premier League have agreed to. I think using the rail seats will increase our attendance to 62,000, so does anyone know is there much work involved in making the designated areas into safe-standing?

Also, I imagine the derby games and those against the top teams would make the use of safe standing something we should do. Although I haven't heard any plans for when Everton will use them.

Good news, let's hope we've got money to spend in this summer window.

Oh and 3 points tomorrow won't go amiss COYB UTFT

It was a good film but it promised to be a great one. So many ideas they could have used — and they underused the brilliant Sarah Lancashire.

The main reason why Villa are in the last 16 of the Champions League and we're in the bottom half is the amount of spending.

There's nothing required to turn the rail seating areas into safe standing. That's the idea.

As far as I understand it, the stadium is equipped to have a greater capacity using safe standing (eg, up to 62k). But it requires more than one person per seat space and the Premier League rules don't currently allow that.

For example, to get to a higher capacity in future, the rules would need to allow 1.5 persons per seat in the lower tier of the new South Stand.

And Chelsea have already sold their stadium hotel to themselves to 'comply' with PSR, so the 'repositioning' of their WSL team doesn't surprise me.

I'm looking forward to the outrage when Brexit Jim gets taxpayers' money to build Man Utd's new stadium.

The Howard Kendall stand is fine but the other three sides will need to be named. Or has this already been decided? The Holy Trinity Stand would be my choice.

No former players, managers or board members for me.

Brighton still haven't named their stands other than North, South, East and West which seems bizarre. Good names help create an identity but maybe Brighton don't have anyone worthy of a whole stand being named after them.

I just think if we name them after past players, then that's it. What happens if the next Kevin Sheedy, Alex Young, or Alan Ball comes along?

I'd personally leave players names to the corporate lounges and suites.

I'd rather see references to our historical heritage if we do name them.

But maybe Dixie can be an exception!

Lounges, fine. But if we start giving them names it looks forced. It's like the name of the stadium. Some (forgive me chaps and ladies) awful suggestions have come up on here.

Everton Stadium is fine for now, Bramley-Moore seems to have naturally become popular (although historically he was an erm, interesting man!) and we will have to put up with a sponsor.

But even the Friedkin Everton Stadium would be preferable to some unbearably saccharine moniker like ‘The People's Stadium', in my view.

If it happened naturally I would like Dock End, Regent Road Stand, and River Stand though. Although probably best the North Stand stays as it is rather than the ‘Sewage Works End'.

But the Howard Kendall stand is a must.

I like Paul's @89 suggestions…

That ring-fencing must have been pretty rusty by now!

The Government carried out trials for safe standing in 2021/22 and it was approved. About 80% of Premier league clubs have safe standing installed but as yet no have been put into operation. Maybe they are waiting for a regulatory body to finally give it the go ahead, but seems madness for most of the Premier League to install them without using them.
I am sure someone on T/W will know why they aren't being used.

It's at Man Utd, Spurs and will be at Everton next season – to name three teams.

I'd put the car salesman in there with those cretins aswell.

That would be our own Sam Hoare, Brian. Paul Weller wrote a song about him.

Sam has spent enough time on here to be a Beatle.

Typically in Germany, it is nearer 2:1. We might not get to that level but an increase of this ratio is what would need to change to increase stadium capacity.

The connection between Regent Rd and Royal Blue seem like a match... someone smarter than me can figure it out.

It was wonderful that we honoured our greatest ever manager at Goodison. But this stadium might stand for, what 50+ years? Things might be very different in another 10 or 20.

Statues, 'walks', lounges. Yeah, name away.

Chelsea's creative accounting bamboozled me but I do note they recently spent around £100M on two players. A nice self-present there. Can we sell ourselves the ladies team?
£100million seems a nice round figure.

I'm not a fan of a rom-com, and I can give The Beatles a miss but I thought the idea and execution was brilliant.

So with that 'cost' coming out it translates to 'profit'?

Maybe one of our financial guys can explain if that's correct.

I'm basing this on the transfer of Robinho to Milan per Swiss Ramble's account

"He was bought for £32.5 million in September 2008 on a four-year contract, so annual amortisation was £8.1 million. He was sold after two years, so cumulative amortisation was £16.2 million, leaving a value of £16.3m in the books. Sale price to Milan is reported as £18 million, so City will report a profit on sale of £1.7 million in the 2010/11 accounts. Therefore, City will show an annual profit improvement of £18.1 million after this deal: £8.3 million lower wages + £8.1 million lower amortisation + £1.7 million profit on sale.”

"Does anyone know is there much work involved in making the designated areas into safe-standing?"

Unlock the seat, raise the seat, lock seat into upright position.

It can be done to get over 60,000 into the ground. It just sounds like regulation/legislation is going to hold it back.

If it's a case of standing in front of your seat with a hand rail in front of you, that's what we do at away matches for the duration of the game anyway, often without the rail!!

I assume they'll just allow more people into each row so it will be shoulder to shoulder rather than the space of a seat width as now?

Paul, it won't happen quickly, but it's a future consideration. As I've already said, I'm comfortable with the near 53,000 as it stands.

Talking of new grounds or stands, I don't know if anyone caught the footage at half time of the corporate suite in Fulham's new Riverside stand? Impressive is an understatement.

The key phrase in the Swiss Ramble piece is "+ 1.7 million profit on sale"

That's what will be shown in the accounts under the player trading figures.

The "annual profit improvement" is merely a calculation of of how much more money will be available in future but it won’t impact any "profit on sale" figure actually included in the books for any particular year.

In other words, instead of having £1.7M available for player purchases, they have £18.1M available.

Big difference. And maybe that greater figure counts in PSR?

But now you're widening the debate into the Economist's view of "profit" versus the Accountant's view.

I was simply trying to clarify what was actually shown in the accounts each year in terms of profit and loss in terms of player trading.

And no... the greater figure certainly does not count towards PSR.

A question though. Will they still issue tickets for specific rows or will it just be a case of filling the spaces?

Going back to the days of “unsafe standing” I don't remember neither aisles nor vomitories in the old Glwadys Street??

Micky @115, they aren't built around Toyota. That is just one of 21 companies on their portfolio, including Everton and AS Roma. At group level, they can absorb that and it could change knowing Donald.

Life will go on.

Mark #117, If they issue season tickets for safe standing areas there would have to be something in the purchase agreement along the lines of 'you could turn up at any time and find that you don't have a seat and will have to stand' or they could just make that part of the ground non-ST and sell to walk-ups on the day?

Maybe someone who has purchased a ST would have an idea from the choices available?

There is no difference in season ticket price for the 'inconvenience' of potentially losing your seat in the South Stand.

It could be that safe standing is only implemented in cup games that are not covered by season tickets?

I'd rather see it put to better use as a model community centre with social housing, a park and health facilities etc… where the people of L4 can reap the benefits.

The second priority is to establish a proper management structure within the business and this is being evidenced by the board appointments, new executive arrivals, whilst releasing those that don't fit (for numerous reasons) with the future plans. It is telling that Colin Chong has retained a position and this is an acknowledgement of the job he has done whilst interim CEO but also what he brings to our future development plans.

Our future development plans will increase Everton's footprint at Bramley-Moore Dock and provide further facilities not only for matchdays but facilities that can be utilised all year round.

On the football front, we will see investment in the playing squad, that's an absolute necessity, but it won't be by waving the cheque book around as we tried in the Moshiri era.

I for one, am massively encouraged by the strategic plans being laid. We have (obviously) a huge competitive gap to close, but I believe the Friedkins have a plan to achieve this.

Maybe build a smaller stadium for the women's, U21s & 18s if it could somehow be squeezed in alongside housing.

I did read somewhere that the centre circle would be preserved and obviously, the statues will remain.

Paul, without your depth and breadth of knowledge, I too feel confident in the foundations being laid for a better future that will see us competing at the right end of the table again.

I agree it feels like TFG have made massive strides in stabilising the financial position of the club and giving it some real direction in terms of its overall development plan.

However, as I have said elsewhere, I'm still worried about the Moshiri legacy of chaos and what it may mean before we reach the end of June. I know PSR figures are hard to come by but, according to the Echo our last 3 years were 21-22 £3.9M, 22-23 £62.7M meaning a “PSR” loss of less than £38.4M in last year's accounts.

The implication was we must have been fairly close to this given the last-minute dealings with Godfrey and Dobbin. I don't know if you have any insights but it sounds like our PSR loss by the end of June has to be in the region of £5M.

I can't see how TFG will have made a massive impact in the 6 months available to them. Unless we can do a Chelsea and sell the women's team back to the club, I worry there will have to be a significant sale before 30 June.

Surprised that The Friedkin Group haven't put something in place on sponsorship of training ground, even if stadium is off limits at moment.

Hopefully it's we don't it...

Not going to happen, is it??

I can't help thinking that those of us crying out for the new stadium to have a somewhat higher capacity may have had a point.