Premier League 2019-2020 we’re off

[Deleted member 16999]

I’m not sure why you feel the need to start digs at posters



Sorry but heard enough West Ham fans on phone ins etc and even I reckon it will be interesting to see what your expectations were at the start of last season - did you really think promises matched reality ? They have spent money lots of it



But this is all football choices as opposed for owners and financial behind the scenes.

It’s all about realistic expectations- there are I believe three levels in the Prem - the top 6 with Everton prob just on the outside - then the middle ground Prem teams which is where I see West Ham and then the teams they will be relegated and battling each season.

That maybe correct currently, but isn’t that the problem, every team should have the chance of winning the PL if they get the opportunity for investment.

A few years back we had the big 4, now it’s the big 6, how are the teams in the middle and bottom meant to compete if there are financial restraints being held over them.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Unfortunately it’s part of modern football now.

It was at the AGM were the £109m deficit came from iirc

Heres the link I’m referring to https://www.skysports.com/football/...but-confident-in-financial-fair-play-position

That’s part of it.
Everton have announced flat revenue, significant reduction in net debt but losses of £111.8m for an extended financial year ending June 2019 at this evening's AGM.

The club's annual report shows turnover of £187.7m, very slightly down from the previous year thanks to merit payments of £24.9m and total broadcast income of £132.7m, with total commercial and sponsorship income rising 40.6% to £29.1m.

In addition, Everton's debt fell from £65.7m last year to just £9.2m but outgoings on player trading and wages, plus off-field investments in Goodison Park, Finch Farm and the Royal Liver Building meant that the club registered record losses for the 13-month period after interest and taxation.

That takes the club's losses over three years to around £94m, still under the £105m threshold mandated by Uefa's Financial Fair Play regulations.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

They use that as a sound bite to gather support

"What's more, unlike some clubs in the Football League, these loans have carried interest payments, much like money loaned from a bank.

Interest on the money loaned has accrued at between 4-6%, club accounts have revealed.
This means that West Ham were seeing liabilities rise by as much as £3million per year in interest payments due on shareholder loans.
The first loan from Gold and Sullivan came in the 2010/11 season, their first full season in charge, when £3million was wired to the club"

"The 2017/18 season was the tipping point: between August 2017 and August 2018, Gold and Sullivan paid themselves a little under £14.6million in interest owed to them on their loans."

Who needs wages of say half a million a year when you are getting interest payments like this

We have always been well under FFP.

We don't even spend the TV money that comes in fully

I’ll come back to a few questions then

If they don’t spent the telly money that comes in how come they run at a loss ?

You said in another post that it “was criminal to reduce the running costs of the club “ - how can it be criminal to do that when the club still runs at a loss ? Do you want them to run a loss each season ?

Surely as an owner they need to balance the books - If West Ham were running at a profit then surely you could question where the money is but if everything earned is going out then where else can the money come from ? Need to find a way to improve the commercial income to put more money into the coffers - or do you want the owners to use their own money

 

[Deleted member 15344]

That maybe correct currently, but isn’t that the problem, every team should have the chance of winning the PL if they get the opportunity for investment.

A few years back we had the big 4, now it’s the big 6, how are the teams in the middle and bottom meant to compete if there are financial restraints being held over them.

We were under the same financial restraints and languishing mid table ten years ago because our financial and commercial model was shocking - a lot of hard work off the pitch by the commercial team allowed the clubs finances to grow plus a bit of luck - Everton have a standing that could also allow them too. Unfortunately these days it’s about being commercial savvy away from the pitch as much as good on the pitch.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

That’s part of it.
Everton have announced flat revenue, significant reduction in net debt but losses of £111.8m for an extended financial year ending June 2019 at this evening's AGM.

The club's annual report shows turnover of £187.7m, very slightly down from the previous year thanks to merit payments of £24.9m and total broadcast income of £132.7m, with total commercial and sponsorship income rising 40.6% to £29.1m.

In addition, Everton's debt fell from £65.7m last year to just £9.2m but outgoings on player trading and wages, plus off-field investments in Goodison Park, Finch Farm and the Royal Liver Building meant that the club registered record losses for the 13-month period after interest and taxation.

That takes the club's losses over three years to around £94m, still under the £105m threshold mandated by Uefa's Financial Fair Play regulations.

Ah that makes it clearer. I wasn’t sure hence the question asked #9781??

 

[Deleted member 16999]

We were under the same financial restraints and languishing mid table ten years ago because our financial and commercial model was shocking - a lot of hard work off the pitch by the commercial team allowed the clubs finances to grow plus a bit of luck - Everton have a standing that could also allow them too. Unfortunately these days it’s about being commercial savvy away from the pitch as much as good on the pitch.

Languishing in mid-table? Bit of poetic license there mate.

Come on Phil, even as a Blue I recognise the profile you have worldwide compared to every other Club, bar Utd, in the PL, you weren’t starting as an unknown team.

Why as a fan should I worry about our profile in Asia if some Russian Billionaire wants to make us his play thing for 10yrs.

I remember the 70’s & 80’s when Merseyside virtually dominated the 1st Division and no one, absolutely no one gave 2 hoots about the financial side.

As others have said previously, it’s now more about business than sport and that’s sad

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Ah that makes it clearer. I wasn’t sure hence the question asked #9781??

And the latest fiddle is Usmanov sponsoring Finch Farm naming rights as that brings in £35mill but doesn’t affect ffp.
Naming rights of the new Stadium will be another dodge of the rules.

 

[PJ87]

I’ll come back to a few questions then

If they don’t spent the telly money that comes in how come they run at a loss ?

You said in another post that it “was criminal to reduce the running costs of the club “ - how can it be criminal to do that when the club still runs at a loss ? Do you want them to run a loss each season ?

Surely as an owner they need to balance the books - If West Ham were running at a profit then surely you could question where the money is but if everything earned is going out then where else can the money come from ? Need to find a way to improve the commercial income to put more money into the coffers - or do you want the owners to use their own money

Where does it say we run at the loss

In 2018 the accounts say

"WH Holding Ltd has today announced its Full Year Results for the year ending 31 May 2018.
The Club made a net profit before tax of £18.3m, a decrease of £25.2m from 2016/17. This was driven by lower income including broadcast revenue, an increase in staff costs, the one-off inclusion in last year’s numbers of the sale of the Boleyn Ground and accounting adjustments for the FA Pension Scheme and triennial property revaluation.
The Club’s net debt, including cash, has fallen by £11.0m and at the end of the season, had £10.0m of short-term funding and £54.5m of shareholder debt.
Turnover was £175.3m, £8m lower than the previous year, driven by a decrease in income including broadcast revenue and fewer home games negatively impacting Retail, Commercial & Sponsorship and Matchday income."

This year we made a loss of 28 million pre tax

So it's hardly year on year loss is it?

The operating costs include their loan repayments plus interest of 4%

So whilst the club is running at s profit or loss and their not claiming wages their getting millions in their pockets aswell. We would make more profit if they just took wages .

Interest free loan and 500k a year each wages would be a good earner for them... Yet greed gets them much more than that ..

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Oh come on Phil, even as a Blue I recognise the profile you have worldwide compared to every other Club, bar Utd, in the PL, you weren’t starting as an unknown team.

Why as a fan should I worry about our profile in Asia if some Russian Billionaire wants to make us his play thing for 10yrs.

I remember the 70’s & 80’s when Merseyside virtually dominated the 1st Division and no one, absolutely no one gave 2 hoots about the financial side.

As others have said previously, it’s now more about business than sport and that’s sad

It’s all well and good having the profile - waste of time if the club doesn’t use that profile commercially- and we weren’t , that’s the difference over the last ten years and why the new deal with Nike is huge for the club - we were dwarved by multiple teams for years in regards commercial enterprise.

And as a fan I would rather the club be self sufficient and commercial viable knowing it stands on its own two feet without the need of some billionaire funds having to hold up the club.

And no one gave two hoots about it in the 70’s and 80’s because it was just within the UK - the minute the premier league started it all changed and became global - the players and clubs care about that because that’s what brings in the money to help the clubs to be a success .

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It’s all well and good having the profile - waste of time if the club doesn’t use that profile commercially- and we weren’t , that’s the difference over the last ten years and why the new deal with Nike is huge for the club - we were dwarved by multiple teams for years in regards commercial enterprise.

And as a fan I would rather the club be self sufficient and commercial viable knowing it stands on its own two feet without the need of some billionaire funds having to hold up the club.

And no one gave two hoots about it in the 70’s and 80’s because it was just within the UK - the minute the premier league started it all changed and became global - the players and clubs care about that because that’s what brings in the money to help the clubs to be a success .

The 70’s & 80’s when you dominated Europe? Highest Profile of all English Clubs, Most successful English Club etc...Players recruited from Africa and Australia? Are you sure it was just UK?

You were competing in the World Club Championship more than 10yrs ago, you’ve never finished lower than 8th, I don’t think you’re truly reflecting the position LPool were in for the period prior to the last 10yrs.

PS. You are owned by foreign billionaires.

 

[pendodave]

Not sure if covered here (apologies if out has), but the fenway group are very low inthe estimations of new englanders at the moment because they've just traded away the 2nd best player in baseball to one of their main rivals in order to save money. Hopefully their penny pinching ways will find their way over to la la land...

 

[Reemul]

It’s all well and good having the profile - waste of time if the club doesn’t use that profile commercially- and we weren’t , that’s the difference over the last ten years and why the new deal with Nike is huge for the club - we were dwarved by multiple teams for years in regards commercial enterprise.

I have to say you really don't seem to get it do you. The Nike deal would never go to a club without a history and profile of a club like Liverpool. If Leicester win the league again they still have zero chance of getting a decent kit deal comparable to the world wide branded clubs. No matter what you say this is a fact. Liverpool are in the club and even without winning the league have always been in the club. We were dwarfed by multiple teams for years, not really, you were poorly managed at a club level but you have never been short of cash or players, you just spent it poorly.

Liverpool are a massive club and has been for 50 years, that brings a lot of benefits most clubs will never get the chance to have and taking away their financial options will never allow them to catch up.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

The 70’s & 80’s when you dominated Europe? Highest Profile of all English Clubs, Most successful English Club etc...Players recruited from Africa and Australia? Are you sure it was just UK?

You were competing in the World Club Championship more than 10yrs ago, you’ve never finished lower than 8th, I don’t think you’re truly reflecting the position LPool were in for the period prior to the last 10yrs.

PS. You are owned by foreign billionaires.

How many people outside the UK watched the English Football league as it was called ? It was just broadcast in the UK with the odd match across Commonwealth countries. I don’t even think the World Club was broadcast on telly

It wasn’t about making money in the 70’s and 80’s - players didn’t earn fortunes - it was a massively different game - it wasn’t about “profiles”

And players from Africa and Australia - overstating that a touch - when it’s a player who was seen playing for Crewe and another at Middlesbrough

Even when we had an upturn during the Rafa years they didn’t take advantage of any commercial value - that changed over the past decade with owners who whilst are billionaires don’t prop the club up with personal fortunes , they own the club but they don’t put any further money into it beyond what the club earns - even the new stand builds were done on loans from them which are being paid back.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

How many people outside the UK watched the English Football league as it was called ? It was just broadcast in the UK with the odd match across Commonwealth countries. I don’t even think the World Club was broadcast on telly

It wasn’t about making money in the 70’s and 80’s - players didn’t earn fortunes - it was a massively different game - it wasn’t about “profiles”

And players from Africa and Australia - overstating that a touch - when it’s a player who was seen playing for Crewe and another at Middlesbrough

Even when we had an upturn during the Rafa years they didn’t take advantage of any commercial value - that changed over the past decade with owners who whilst are billionaires don’t prop the club up with personal fortunes , they own the club but they don’t put any further money into it beyond what the club earns - even the new stand builds were done on loans from them which are being paid back.

OK, obviously we see it different, I see the football and trophies as more important, not the p+l sheet.

Overstating? Please expand you languishing as a mid-table team for all those years, unless the PL had only 16 Clubs, you’ve never been mid-table.

Those players brought coverage and raised your profile in their respective Countries.

Be assured FSG don’t see Lpool as a charity, they are making millions from you.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

OK, obviously we see it different, I see the football and trophies as more important, not the p+l sheet.

Clubs don’t win trophies without good balance sheets anymore - good financial awareness are key to a club being a success on the pitch - if they don’t get successful off the pitch they won’t win a thing

Overstating? Please expand you languishing as a mid-table team for all those years, unless the PL had only 16 Clubs, you’ve never been mid-table.

Where did i say “for all those years” - when the new owners took over we were in the bottom half of the league , in debt and losing all our best players. The club were run poorly off the pitch for years - and didn’t take advantage of any global appeal on any commercial level whilst other clubs were.

Those players brought coverage and raised your profile in their respective Countries.

What coverage ? The english league didn’t suddenly explode in Africa because we had a guy from Zimbabwe playing for us or in Australia because of Johnston - the media platform wasn’t there for it to happen

Be assured FSG don’t see Lpool as a charity, they are making millions from you.

Where did I say they see us as a charity? They may well make millions somewhere because of us but it’s not money coming from club into their pockets.

 

[Slime]

Dont worry Slimey old boy, I’ll crank it up another level or 2 ??

 

[Fade and Die]

I’ll come back to a few questions then

If they don’t spent the telly money that comes in how come they run at a loss ?

You said in another post that it “was criminal to reduce the running costs of the club “ - how can it be criminal to do that when the club still runs at a loss ? Do you want them to run a loss each season ?

Surely as an owner they need to balance the books - If West Ham were running at a profit then surely you could question where the money is but if everything earned is going out then where else can the money come from ? Need to find a way to improve the commercial income to put more money into the coffers - or do you want the owners to use their own money

Of course we do, otherwise what is the point of having wealthy owners?
They have soaked millions out of the club in interest payments and made a fortune selling Upton Park...people criticise Mike Ashley but all the money he put into Newcastle was interest free.
Personally if we go down and the owners lose a packet I will be highly delighted!... It won’t bother me, I actually enjoy Championship Footy.

Will I miss the delights of watching some preening, over-tattooed household-name throwing himself around like a rag doll in a hurricane to "win" a penalty? No.
Will I miss VAR? Of course not...The club continues. In whatever division they play. I'll still watch. And I'll still support. And I may well enjoy it all the more.

 

[PJ87]

Of course we do, otherwise what is the point of having wealthy owners?
They have soaked millions out of the club in interest payments and made a fortune selling Upton Park...people criticise Mike Ashley but all the money he put into Newcastle was interest free.
Personally if we go down and the owners lose a packet I will be highly delighted!... It won’t bother me, I actually enjoy Championship Footy.

Will I miss the delights of watching some preening, over-tattooed household-name throwing himself around like a rag doll in a hurricane to "win" a penalty? No.
Will I miss VAR? Of course not...The club continues. In whatever division they play. I'll still watch. And I'll still support. And I may well enjoy it all the more.

Whilst It wont be so easy to get out this time the owners are more suited to that level

The level they invest gets them out the champ

Nolan was a great signing for a championship club

Come January we bought the second highest goal scorer in the champ for peanuts

We had bought maynard , Carew , loads of named who were perfect for that level even if maynard didn't hit it off for us he was proven at that level

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Clubs don’t win trophies without good balance sheets anymore - good financial awareness are key to a club being a success on the pitch - if they don’t get successful off the pitch they won’t win a thing.

Really? You’ve mentioned Utd’s plight yet they recently won 3 trophies under Jose.
Financial awareness would be irrelevant if FFP wasn’t in place.

Where did i say “for all those years” - when the new owners took over we were in the bottom half of the league , in debt and losing all our best players. The club were run poorly off the pitch for years - and didn’t take advantage of any global appeal on any commercial level whilst other clubs were.
You brought the word “Lanquished” in to the discussion, the definition of which is:
to exist in an unpleasant or unwanted situation, often for a long time.
Does that really define the situation yous were in when FSG took over in Oct 2010? Prior to that yous had finished top 4 in 8 out of the previous 11 seasons, winning 9 trophies.

What coverage ? The english league didn’t suddenly explode in Africa because we had a guy from Zimbabwe playing for us or in Australia because of Johnston - the media platform wasn’t there for it to happen.
Agreed we never had the media platform we do today, but you can’t deny you weren’t a global commodity that would of had your profile raised by signing the likes of Grobbelar and Johnson etc.

Where did I say they see us as a charity? They may well make millions somewhere because of us but it’s not money coming from club into their pockets.
You need to read the Lpool accounts, FSG have had some of their loans and interests paid. I agree they look like they are decent owners(with the odd hiccup) but do you really mean it’s not money coming from the club into their pockets?

 

[Fish]

Of course we do, otherwise what is the point of having wealthy owners?
They have soaked millions out of the club in interest payments and made a fortune selling Upton Park...people criticise Mike Ashley but all the money he put into Newcastle was interest free.
Personally if we go down and the owners lose a packet I will be highly delighted!... It won’t bother me, I actually enjoy Championship Footy.

Will I miss the delights of watching some preening, over-tattooed household-name throwing himself around like a rag doll in a hurricane to "win" a penalty? No.
Will I miss VAR? Of course not...The club continues. In whatever division they play. I'll still watch. And I'll still support. And I may well enjoy it all the more.

I think its more of a requirement for directors at West Ham to loan their own money to the club if needed, especially if its interest free, as the difference between them, and most, if not all other clubs, is, if other clubs are running at a loss, they can only do that whilst their assets exceed those debts/losses, otherwise they're insolvent, but I'd think that West Ham's assets are significantly less than any other club in the league as they own less, especially as they rent their ground, so they don't have any security, so I'd think it's tougher for the likes of West Ham to balance the books and operate within their means than most if not all other clubs who have substantial assets and other investments.