| Paying dividends — Column on 15:52 - Feb 28 with 4843 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Huge thanks to Simon for this. Clear and succinct, even for a financial luddite like me.
Excellent set of accounts. A huge well done to those at the club who worked hard for this. |  |
|  |
| Paying dividends — Column on 15:56 - Feb 28 with 4830 views | thehat |
Fantastic article and very well communicated - thank you
Great to see us moving in the right direction but we still rely heavily on our shareholders pumping in cash to keep us afloat.
Do we know if they are still converting debt to shares hence writing off their loans? |  | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 15:57 - Feb 28 with 4819 views | derbyhoop |
With gate income under £6m and Cost of Sales running at 27m it's not hard to see why, like most other clubs without parachute payments, the accounts are a horror story, redeemed by player sales.
Short of promotion to the gravy train, sorry Premier League, we will still be reliant on support from the owners and/or significant player sales.
How many of the current side could command those fees and at what level? |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Paying dividends — Column on 16:39 - Feb 28 with 4690 views | PinnerPaul |
Excellent piece, thanks very much. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 16:51 - Feb 28 with 4651 views | terryb |
Cheers Simon.
It was hard to take all of this article in whilst listening to the latest from Ukraine & the UN. I will try again later, or let Simon give me an explanation in the pub on Saturday!
I do know that we both thought it was a bloody good set of accounts when they were announced. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 19:41 - Feb 28 with 4331 views | SimonD |
| Paying dividends — Column on 15:56 - Feb 28 by thehat |
Fantastic article and very well communicated - thank you
Great to see us moving in the right direction but we still rely heavily on our shareholders pumping in cash to keep us afloat.
Do we know if they are still converting debt to shares hence writing off their loans? |
£17.1m in that set of accounts. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:33 - Mar 1 with 3767 views | francisbowles |
Thank you, Simon. Great explanation. It's good to know that the P&S is under control and although there is still a long way to go, the club is not only moving in the right direction but is some way down the road to a more sustainable future. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 16:27 - Mar 1 with 3387 views | WatfordR |
Thanks also for taking the time to analyse all this and summarise it in a way that the rest of us can understand.
Have to say, I'm amazed there haven't been more posts on this thread. Incredible job being done by the club's hierarchy not only to get us in a position to compete but also getting us ahead of most of the rest. We're in a good place that's getting better with each year that goes by.
If that trend over the last 3-4 years had been reversed, I guess there'd be seven or eight pages of posts here now instead of just seven or eight posts. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Paying dividends — Column on 18:30 - Mar 1 with 3239 views | Hoopstar |
I think you're right there - much easier to write lengthy diatribes when things are going badly!
I think I've been in a state of shock for about eighteen months at how well the club is being run off the pitch - the future is so bright with the current squad, the value it carries and our overall position finally giving us that negotiating wedge that Brentford are so good at! |  | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 18:42 - Mar 1 with 3213 views | NewBee |
Though I'm no accountant, I agree that these look like impressive figures.
It's interesting that they came out around the same time as the mighty Arsenal announced a record loss of £107.3m, while little old Cheltenham Town reported a profit of £10k. [Post edited 1 Mar 2022 18:43]
| | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 22:29 - Mar 3 with 2703 views | loneranger1 |
Thanks very much, Simon - still haven't understood it all, but get that we're in a far better place than we were thanks in no small part to the hard work being done behind the scenes. Certainly bodes well for the future... | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:05 - Mar 4 with 2561 views | dublinr |
Missed your article and just read it now, Simon. Thank you very much for presenting the finances so clearly.
It seems that in normal world accounts we're moving from absolutely catastrophic to merely appalling (so in football accounts that's from not great to f*ck me). Good stuff.
I spent years (the years of the ABC loan) wondering how long I'd have a club to support. I'm not so worried now, and that's despite the pandemic and its effects. A big well done to everyone concerned. | |
| |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:14 - Mar 4 with 2549 views | stevec |
Relatively speaking, a good set of accounts, but an operating loss of £21 mill sums up the dire state of EFL football. In essence, to keep within 3 year losses of £39 million (think about that number for a minute) we need to find an Eze every 3 years. That’s astounding.
The next TV agreement should be held to account for the discrepancy in football finances.
Aside of that, it’s fairly apparent that at this level we’ve exhausted all available football income, short of whacking up ticket prices which is often counter productive. Given the constant accumulated losses wonder if the owners consider the option of bringing in someone from private industry to look at income away from football, buying up small but successful companies to grow and provide income to the football club.
It would take a while but, over time, could gradually erode the need for selling our best players. |  | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:54 - Mar 4 with 2476 views | switchingcode |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:14 - Mar 4 by stevec |
Relatively speaking, a good set of accounts, but an operating loss of £21 mill sums up the dire state of EFL football. In essence, to keep within 3 year losses of £39 million (think about that number for a minute) we need to find an Eze every 3 years. That’s astounding.
The next TV agreement should be held to account for the discrepancy in football finances.
Aside of that, it’s fairly apparent that at this level we’ve exhausted all available football income, short of whacking up ticket prices which is often counter productive. Given the constant accumulated losses wonder if the owners consider the option of bringing in someone from private industry to look at income away from football, buying up small but successful companies to grow and provide income to the football club.
It would take a while but, over time, could gradually erode the need for selling our best players. |
Relatively they are only because if you look at other Championship clubs accounts where you see startling losses.Most clubs have lost about 5 mill on gate receipts because of Covid but still have playing budgets of over 25 mill.I think this will drive down prices for Efl players in the summer as clubs will be desperate for monies to balance the books.I would add the gap between championship teams and PL is getting wider as the prospect of all promoted teams getting relegated this season supports this.Toney and more so Mitrovic scored for fun in the championship but struggle in PL.The promotion run in is going to be interesting with so many clubs in the mix this season. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:55 - Mar 4 with 2481 views | Northernr |
Meanwhile Stoke have lost £150m over two seasons but apparently are still not in breach. I'm sure Hoos has taken that news well. |  | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:05 - Mar 4 with 2458 views | stevec |
| Paying dividends — Column on 08:55 - Mar 4 by Northernr |
Meanwhile Stoke have lost £150m over two seasons but apparently are still not in breach. I'm sure Hoos has taken that news well. |
How comes? I wouldn’t have thought even parachute payments cover much of that. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:19 - Mar 4 with 2444 views | Northernr |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:05 - Mar 4 by stevec |
How comes? I wouldn’t have thought even parachute payments cover much of that. |
I don't understand, and neither do most of the finance experts on socials, other than to say it comes down to the club being a subsidiary of Bet365 which, rather depressingly, took £60bn in bets last year. That's not much of an answer though because otherwise we could just say QPR is a subsidiary of Tune. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 10:36 - Mar 4 with 2341 views | stevec |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:19 - Mar 4 by Northernr |
I don't understand, and neither do most of the finance experts on socials, other than to say it comes down to the club being a subsidiary of Bet365 which, rather depressingly, took £60bn in bets last year. That's not much of an answer though because otherwise we could just say QPR is a subsidiary of Tune. |
You mention Stoke loss of £150 mill over 2 seasons. As they’ve only completed 3 seasons in the Championship perhaps the third year hasn’t yet been taken into consideration. Im guessing this will come home to roost for them next season? | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:14 - Mar 4 with 2269 views | SimonD |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:19 - Mar 4 by Northernr |
I don't understand, and neither do most of the finance experts on socials, other than to say it comes down to the club being a subsidiary of Bet365 which, rather depressingly, took £60bn in bets last year. That's not much of an answer though because otherwise we could just say QPR is a subsidiary of Tune. |
I posted this on the Derby thread as the best I could piece this together from their accounts.
--------
There are a few considerations here.
The holding company's financial year does not end in the close season so they will have to supply the EFL an adjusted set of accounts to cover the right period, so those losses won't be the correct ones for FFP.
Stoke City FC's accounts to May 2020 which do cover an acceptable period show a loss of £88m. However they also detail £38m of Covid costs which get deducted from that: £4m lost revenue, £4m costs and £30m impairment. They have argued that the collapse of the transfer market due to Covid-19 has forced them to reduce the book value of their squad by that amount and claimed it as a Covid cost.
It is also worth remembering that when their May 2021 accounts are released it is the average of the two years which will be used in their P&S calculation. With 2020 & 2021 counting as one year, the other two years are obviously 2019 and 2018. Stoke were in the Premier League for the season ending in 2018 and so are allowed a loss of £35m that season.
Maybe, after allowing for their standard disallowable costs they will squeeze through. if they do they will have to change something pretty drastically to get through the next financial year without breaching FFP.
--------
As my old mate Tramore from my Not606 days suggested, their impairment deduction has about as much substance as Derby's amortisation "method" but I guess it will take the EFL some time to stir themselves into action. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:21 - Mar 4 with 2248 views | Northernr |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:14 - Mar 4 by SimonD |
I posted this on the Derby thread as the best I could piece this together from their accounts.
--------
There are a few considerations here.
The holding company's financial year does not end in the close season so they will have to supply the EFL an adjusted set of accounts to cover the right period, so those losses won't be the correct ones for FFP.
Stoke City FC's accounts to May 2020 which do cover an acceptable period show a loss of £88m. However they also detail £38m of Covid costs which get deducted from that: £4m lost revenue, £4m costs and £30m impairment. They have argued that the collapse of the transfer market due to Covid-19 has forced them to reduce the book value of their squad by that amount and claimed it as a Covid cost.
It is also worth remembering that when their May 2021 accounts are released it is the average of the two years which will be used in their P&S calculation. With 2020 & 2021 counting as one year, the other two years are obviously 2019 and 2018. Stoke were in the Premier League for the season ending in 2018 and so are allowed a loss of £35m that season.
Maybe, after allowing for their standard disallowable costs they will squeeze through. if they do they will have to change something pretty drastically to get through the next financial year without breaching FFP.
--------
As my old mate Tramore from my Not606 days suggested, their impairment deduction has about as much substance as Derby's amortisation "method" but I guess it will take the EFL some time to stir themselves into action. |
Thank you mate. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:44 - Mar 4 with 2185 views | Northernr |
£34m loss at Forest, reduced to £20m by player sales down the Olympiakos highway. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 12:47 - Mar 4 with 2121 views | stevec |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:14 - Mar 4 by SimonD |
I posted this on the Derby thread as the best I could piece this together from their accounts.
--------
There are a few considerations here.
The holding company's financial year does not end in the close season so they will have to supply the EFL an adjusted set of accounts to cover the right period, so those losses won't be the correct ones for FFP.
Stoke City FC's accounts to May 2020 which do cover an acceptable period show a loss of £88m. However they also detail £38m of Covid costs which get deducted from that: £4m lost revenue, £4m costs and £30m impairment. They have argued that the collapse of the transfer market due to Covid-19 has forced them to reduce the book value of their squad by that amount and claimed it as a Covid cost.
It is also worth remembering that when their May 2021 accounts are released it is the average of the two years which will be used in their P&S calculation. With 2020 & 2021 counting as one year, the other two years are obviously 2019 and 2018. Stoke were in the Premier League for the season ending in 2018 and so are allowed a loss of £35m that season.
Maybe, after allowing for their standard disallowable costs they will squeeze through. if they do they will have to change something pretty drastically to get through the next financial year without breaching FFP.
--------
As my old mate Tramore from my Not606 days suggested, their impairment deduction has about as much substance as Derby's amortisation "method" but I guess it will take the EFL some time to stir themselves into action. |
Cheers for that.
Have we missed a trick with Covid 19 costs regarding subsequent devaluation of players? Perhaps we didn’t have a very high valuation in the first place! | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 19:31 - Mar 4 with 1976 views | SimonD |
| Paying dividends — Column on 12:47 - Mar 4 by stevec |
Cheers for that.
Have we missed a trick with Covid 19 costs regarding subsequent devaluation of players? Perhaps we didn’t have a very high valuation in the first place! |
Your hunch was right. Our squad's net book value at the end of the 2019/20 season was only £42k, that really didn't give us a lot of scope. | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:35 - Mar 5 with 1867 views | francisbowles |
| Paying dividends — Column on 19:31 - Mar 4 by SimonD |
Your hunch was right. Our squad's net book value at the end of the 2019/20 season was only £42k, that really didn't give us a lot of scope. |
£42,000? | | | |
| Paying dividends — Column on 11:11 - Mar 5 with 1804 views | SimonD |
| Paying dividends — Column on 09:35 - Mar 5 by francisbowles |
£42,000? |
Yes. At that point I think that Liam Kelly was the only player at the club that we'd paid a transfer fee for. his overall cost was £55k and had been amortised down to £42k.
By contrast, the book value at the end of May 21 had increased to £6.9 million. Dickie, Dykes, Willock, Bonne, Walsh and Kelman and anyone else I've forgotten. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
