Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[SUPERTOON]

39 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Didn’t Leicester sell Dewsburry-Hall to Chelsea?

Don’t think that has gone through yet ?

[Wallace]

Problem is whilst we are making up that £200m, the others aren’t standing still waiting for us to catch up.

[The Butcher]

10 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Well we've already finished in the CL. 

Just 26 points behind City.

[Jackie Broon]

23 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Under the current rules - it doesn't really matter that we are state-backed. We can't inflate sponsorships.

Our revenues are 7th & 8th together. Ours is higher but not significantly so. Their wages are higher but not significantly so. Especially after Bruno, Joelintn & Isak deals.

 

We are closer to Villa in revenue than Spurs.

 

We are in the same boat friend.

 

We still have the ability to inflate sponsorship deals, our Adidas deal is worth double that of Villa's. When I pointed that out before you essentially said us and Villa aren't in the same boat because we have more potential. We don't have the ability to inflate deals to the extent we would without the way the FMV rules are currently operated, but we are probably still be doing it and getting deals that we wouldn't get if we weren't state owned. 

[The College Dropout]

10 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

We still have the ability to inflate sponsorship deals, our Adidas deal is worth double that of Villa's. When I pointed that out before you essentially said us and Villa aren't in the same boat because we have more potential. We don't have the ability to inflate deals to the extent we would without the way the FMV rules are currently operated, but we are probably still be doing it and getting deals that we wouldn't get if we weren't state owned. 

I agree with that.

 

The boat I'm talking about is - not being able to generate enough revenue to maintain spending and fighting for top 4 or better year in and year out.

 

We have the same problem with PSR and neither of us has easy levers to exploit.

 

It's the top 6. And the rest. We are still part of the rest with no easy escape route.

 

We can't inflate sponsorships to the point where we are in another stratosphere from Villa revenue-wise.

 

Total revenues (slightly out of date):

 

72m more than Villa. 194m less than Spurs - the smallest top 6 side. It's the top 6 vs everybody else. That's the boat that matters IMO.

 

 

 

Under the current rules - how do we bridge that gap?

 

 

Edited July 2 by The College Dropout

[aussiemag]

With year after year of finishing in the top 6, fair market value will change for us and we will be allowed to inflate our Saudi sponsorships. There may be other social media metrics like instagram followers etc. that come into the FMV assessment though? The club should start doing competitions for instagram followers to win money or holidays. Get those subscriber numbers up. 

[Jackie Broon]

14 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I agree with that.

 

The boat I'm talking about is - not being able to generate enough revenue to maintain spending and fighting for top 4 or better year in and year out.

 

We have the same problem with PSR and neither of us has easy levers to exploit.

 

It's the top 6. And the rest. We are still part of the rest with no easy escape route.

 

We can't inflate sponsorships to the point where we are in another stratosphere from Villa revenue-wise.

 

Total revenues (slightly out of date):

 

72m more than Villa. 194m less than Spurs - the smallest top 6 side. It's the top 6 vs everybody else. That's the boat that matters IMO.

 

 

 

Under the current rules - how do we bridge that gap?

 

 

 

 

Our revenue for 23/24 is likely to be in the mid 300 millions.

 

If we continue to finish around the top 6 then eventually our FMV will be at the level of other top 6 clubs.

 

 

Edited July 2 by Jackie Broon

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I agree with that.

 

The boat I'm talking about is - not being able to generate enough revenue to maintain spending and fighting for top 4 or better year in and year out.

 

We have the same problem with PSR and neither of us has easy levers to exploit.

 

It's the top 6. And the rest. We are still part of the rest with no easy escape route.

 

We can't inflate sponsorships to the point where we are in another stratosphere from Villa revenue-wise.

 

Total revenues (slightly out of date):

 

72m more than Villa. 194m less than Spurs - the smallest top 6 side. It's the top 6 vs everybody else. That's the boat that matters IMO.

 

 

 

Under the current rules - how do we bridge that gap?

 

 

 

 

Was looking at the 2007 accounts the other day, our commercial revenue was better than Spurs and was within 70% of Liverpool's earnings.

 

There surely should be some sort of leeway, argument for a new ownership group being able to bridge that gap and account it for a previous owner's negligence using its own cash until the commercial deals catch back up, quoting where we were before him. 

 

When you look at the gap growth annually, it's probably billions we've slipped behind those two clubs. 

 

 

Edited July 2 by Optimistic Nut

[Slim]

Worrying 

[Ben]

2 minutes ago, Slim said:

Worrying 

 

Why ?

[Keegans Export]

3 minutes ago, Slim said:

Worrying 

I don't know what that Tweet is getting at - are some fans thinking that the money we earned from playing in the CL last season is going to be paid this season? I thought it was fairly obvious any CL income would be part of the 23/24 accounts/PSR calculations.

[The College Dropout]

25 minutes ago, aussiemag said:

With year after year of finishing in the top 6, fair market value will change for us and we will be allowed to inflate our Saudi sponsorships. There may be other social media metrics like instagram followers etc. that come into the FMV assessment though? The club should start doing competitions for instagram followers to win money or holidays. Get those subscriber numbers up. 

How do we finish in the top 6 year after year without top 6 revenues?

 

26 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Our revenue for 23/24 is likely to be in the mid 300 millions.

 

If we continue to finish around the top 6 then eventually our FMV will be at the level of other top 6 clubs.

 

 

 

£35m from CL. Where's the additional £70m coming from? The player sales? If so, where's the £70m coming from next season? We don't have a legit pipeline of youth talent. Villa do though.

 

If we continue to finish 7th, our FMV will be 7th by a huge margin - as it is now.

[Slim]

4 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

Why ?

50m PSR shortfall in the year that *included* UCL money.

[Keegans Export]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

How do we finish in the top 6 year after year without top 6 revenues?

 

We've come within a whisker of doing that for the past two seasons in fairness. If we bring in the players we think we need (CB, RW) would we not all hope for another top 6 finish this season?

 

I do agree with your broader point though, we're going to hit a brick wall at some point where we're going to have to rely on selling one of our top assets and hope we reinvest it well. Trying to bridge that income gap versus the top 6 is going to be impossible in the short-term under the current FMV rules.

[Ben]

2 minutes ago, Slim said:

50m PSR shortfall in the year that *included* UCL money.

 

Is there any truth in the rumour that the EPL are holding off on some of our sponsor deals ?

[duo]

43 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I agree with that.

 

The boat I'm talking about is - not being able to generate enough revenue to maintain spending and fighting for top 4 or better year in and year out.

 

We have the same problem with PSR and neither of us has easy levers to exploit.

 

It's the top 6. And the rest. We are still part of the rest with no easy escape route.

 

We can't inflate sponsorships to the point where we are in another stratosphere from Villa revenue-wise.

 

Total revenues (slightly out of date):

 

72m more than Villa. 194m less than Spurs - the smallest top 6 side. It's the top 6 vs everybody else. That's the boat that matters IMO.

 

 

 

Under the current rules - how do we bridge that gap?

 

 

 

How have spurs such a bigger income?

[Slim]

1 minute ago, Ben said:

 

Is there any truth in the rumour that the EPL are holding off on some of our sponsor deals ?

 

No idea.  

 

Has any actual reporters said this?

[gdm]

4 minutes ago, Slim said:

50m PSR shortfall in the year that *included* UCL money.

It’s a 50m shortfall coz we’ve spent a fortune over the last 3 years while bringing very little money in. The first year has now dropped off and better commercial deals have been done and will be done. Can’t say I know too much about it but i wouldn’t say it’s worrying at all 

[Fezzle]

10 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

I don't know what that Tweet is getting at - are some fans thinking that the money we earned from playing in the CL last season is going to be paid this season? I thought it was fairly obvious any CL income would be part of the 23/24 accounts/PSR calculations.

Yeah i dont understand how anyone could get that confused.

[Bondedcrown]

1 minute ago, gdm said:

It’s a 50m shortfall coz we’ve spent a fortune over the last 3 years while bringing very little money in. The first year has now dropped off and better commercial deals have been done and will be done. Can’t say I know too much about it but i wouldn’t say it’s worrying at all 

Didn't you get the memo? Our owners are shit and don't know what they are doing neither does our manager! Come on keep up!

[Dr Venkman]

1 hour ago, TRon said:

 

Boehly is coming from the US where they are a lot less squeamish about sidelining the little clubs and supporting the rest of the league. Over there it's probably more reflective of their attitude towards money. If you have it, you can do what you like, if you don't tough luck and get out of the way.

All of the major US sports leagues have systems in place to assure parity. 

[Dr Venkman]

13 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

How do we finish in the top 6 year after year without top 6 revenues?

[Jackie Broon]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

How do we finish in the top 6 year after year without top 6 revenues?

 

£35m from CL. Where's the additional £70m coming from? The player sales? If so, where's the £70m coming from next season? We don't have a legit pipeline of youth talent. Villa do though.

 

If we continue to finish 7th, our FMV will be 7th by a huge margin - as it is now.

 

Without the pretty much unprecedented injury crisis we had in the past season we would have easily finished top 6. There's a very good chance we'll finish in the top 6 this season without the demands of European football. Our FMV is not hugely less than the top 6 now, the PL has allowed us to sign deals similar to what they get, it's just obviously taking a lot of time to justify each one so it will be a longer process than we would like.

[The College Dropout]

5 minutes ago, gdm said:

It’s a 50m shortfall coz we’ve spent a fortune over the last 3 years while bringing very little money in. The first year has now dropped off and better commercial deals have been done and will be done. Can’t say I know too much about it but i wouldn’t say it’s worrying at all 

The losses for those years fall off. But the costs for that spending we carry (amortisation and wages) into this year. 

[Keegans Export]

5 minutes ago, gdm said:

It’s a 50m shortfall coz we’ve spent a fortune over the last 3 years while bringing very little money in. The first year has now dropped off and better commercial deals have been done and will be done. Can’t say I know too much about it but i wouldn’t say it’s worrying at all 

Yeah exactly this. If we think about it in individual years rather than the cycle it makes more sense;

 

21/22 - Ashley-level income, substantial investment in squad (Willock, Bruno, Trips, Burn), mid-table finish

22/23 - Marginal increase in income, further investment in squad, more prize money from 4th place finish

23/24 - Increased income from CL, SELA sponsorship plus sales of Wood, Minteh & Anderson

 

So we've got two years where we made a hefty loss and the third year where we presumably actually made a profit. That first year of hefty losses now drops off and we start 24/25 with the new Adidas deal, plus (hopefully) training gear/ground sponsorship too.