|
|
Post by Macmoish on Feb 9, 2011 7:50:55 GMT
Independent
Moyes' struggle is laid bare in financial results
By Ian Herbert, Northern Football Correspondent
David Moyes' uphill battle to compete at the top end of the Premier League was revealed yesterday in annual results which showed Everton are spending nearly 70 per cent of their income on wages and running at a £3.1m loss despite maintaining near record turnover.Moyes said earlier this month that he feared key players may depart if they cannot be convinced that the club has ambition and, though chief executive Robert Elstone delivered a strong riposte yesterday to those who have perpetuated rumours that the marginally delayed publication of the accounts has put the club at risk of administration, the figures do reveal the club's struggle to keep up with Premier League spending elsewhere. A wage bill up to £54.3m – 69 per cent of turnover – and continued investment in players have contributed to the level of debt at the club rising from £41m in 2009 to £48m. Though Elstone argues that the Everton side who beat Blackpool on Saturday constituted "an enviable team sheet", Moyes has been able to spend only what he has raised for the past three years. The £21m investment in Sylvain Distin, Diniyar Bilyaletdinov and John Heitinga in 2009 followed Manchester City's £22m purchase of Joleon Lescott, while last year Moyes spent what money was available on securing Mikel Arteta, leighton Baines, Tim Cahill and Jack Rodwell on new long-term contracts. The accounts revealed that the sale of the club's Bellefield training ground was used to pay off previous loans while turnover remained static in the year to May 2010: down £600,000 to £79.1m, with the absence of the previous year's Cup run a contributory factory. Everton's problem is a fundamental one: as Elstone put it, "the billionaire is yet to knock on the front door at Goodison". The decision of a Government inquiry to refuse plans which would have seen Everton relocate to an out-of-town stadium at Kirkby have proved as gravely significant as Everton always feared. It prevented them from developing a facility-led development model, which would have radically increased match-day revenues to help meet wage and transfer market demands. Everton take £600,000 on a match day; Arsenal pocket £3m. Though dissatisfaction among some fans has arisen from the departure on loan of Yakubu Aiyegbeni, Joseph Yobo and James Vaughan, and the sale to Tottenham of Steven Pienaar, with no players coming in during January, Elstone said that the loan deals had "the blessing of the manager". Sources in Yobo's native Nigeria suggested yesterday the 30-year-old did not want to return to Goodison, having been loaned to Fenerbahce. Elstone also said Everton had "worked incredibly hard, for almost two years, to keep Pienaar, offering a lucrative new contract that in the end was rejected". Fans demand that the club's chairman, Bill Kenwright, reveal his asking price for the club, though that is hardly the way to sell any asset. Kenwright has said that he wants to sell and with the level of support holding up so well – average attendances for Premier League games at Goodison Park increased from 35,667 to 36,729 and season ticket numbers increased by 8 per cent from 23,717 to 25,671 – it is hard to believe that a new stadium would not have enticed a new proprietor. "The simple facts are [that] approaching 85p in every £1 we bring in ends up, one way or another, at our [Finch Farm] training ground," Elstone said. "From young prospects, to scouts, to medical support, to coaches and, of course, to our first team squad, almost £70m, out of our £80m of income ends up [there.]" But with Arteta and Baines the subject of interest from Arsenal and Bayern Munich respectively, that £70m may not be enough. Moyes joked two weeks ago that even Crawley Town had outspent him in January – which they had – and with the relegation-haunted sides of the Premier League displaying far more inclination to spend, Everton need a considerably richer Russian than Bilyaletdinov to arrive at the door in a hurry. www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/moyes-struggle-is-laid-bare-in-financial-results-2208440.html
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Feb 9, 2011 13:24:38 GMT
BBC
Chairman defends Everton's 'sensible' spending Chairman Bill Kenwright has defended low-spending Everton's "sensible" management of the club's finances. Boss David Moyes recently stated he was concerned disgruntled players might leave because of limited transfer funds, causing worry among some fans. But Kenwright, who admitted money is tight, said the club's latest accounts showed that they are still competitive. Chief executive Robert Elstone stated Everton "walk football's tightrope of good financial management pretty well." Football's finances are once again under the spotlight with a new government inquiry into how football is run, which started on Tuesday, looking at whether there is too much debt in the professional game. The Toffees announced a turnover of £79.1m, with £79.6m of operating costs, for the period covering 1 June 2009 to 31 May 2010. Everton's net debt had gone up £7m from the previous financial year - now standing at £44.9m - while their wage bill had increased from 62% to 69% of its turnover. During the 12 months in question, the Toffees reinvested some of the profit from their £19m sale of Joleon Lescott to Manchester City and signed Sylvain Distin, John Heitinga and Diniyar Bilyaletdinov. They also recruited Landon Donovan on loan while renegotiating contracts for Louis Saha, Tim Howard, Jack Rodwell, Joseph Yobo and Phil Jagielka as Everton finished eighth in the Premier League. "From a financial perspective, the year was one which was underpinned by sensible business management," explained Kenwright in a statement on the club's website. "This enabled us to continue to do everything within our collective power to help the manager in his concerted efforts to build a squad which would challenge the top four. "Irrespective of their standing within the various leagues, clubs will invariably be judged on two things - performance and level of support. "Our average attendance for Premier League games at Goodison Park rose to almost 37,000 during the course of the last campaign. "That's a statistic which delights me but does not surprise me, simply because we are fortunate enough to boast the most loyal and knowledgeable crowd in British football." Everton's average attendance increased from 35,667 to 36,729, while season ticket numbers went up from 23,717 to 25,671 - a rise of 8%, which generated £19.2m. Kenwright also stressed that spending a vast amount of money, the likes of which Chelsea spent recently with the £50m capture of Fernando Torres from Liverpool, is not the sole factor in winning matches. "Yes, those clubs fortunate enough to boast a rich and generous benefactor undoubtedly have a clearly defined advantage," added Kenwright. It is a healthy set of accounts, but like the vast majority of football clubs and businesses today money is tight Chief executive Robert Elstone "But the outcome of crucial matches are quite often decided not by the size of the bank balance but more by skill, good fortune or the whim of a referee." Chief executive Elstone told the Liverpool Daily Post that the club is continuing to look for an investor to buy out Kenwright but that Everton do not need to sell stars like Marouane Fellaini or Rodwell to balance the books. "We're looking at a pretty good set of accounts, based on turnover holding up and looking solid in tough economic times," he said. "It is a healthy set of accounts but like the vast majority of football clubs and businesses today money is tight. "It will not stop us being ambitious and we will continue doing that. "Our chairman has repeatedly said money is tight. In football you walk a tightrope of good financial management. I think we walk that tightrope pretty well. "It is fair to say we have not got a big transfer war chest, I can't see us smashing our record transfer fee on a regular basis. "We have to continue to invest in new players. We have brought in some talented youngsters from abroad. We have to be astute in the transfer market and the manager and the chairman have a good record in doing that." Manager Moyes recently said he would talk to Kenwright about the ambition of the club in order to offer squad members "some hope and encouragement over what we are going to do [in the future]". The Toffees sold midfielder Steven Pienaar to Tottenham for £3m in January. newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/e/everton/9390882.stm
|
|
|
|
Post by rolands59 on Feb 9, 2011 13:37:12 GMT
Looks to me like if they hadn't bought Bilyaletdinov they'd actully be making money instead of losing it  I don't need Mr. Ingham to tell me that's pretty good for the EPL  |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Feb 10, 2011 7:29:42 GMT
Makes you wonder about the smaller clubs - such as ourselves  Guardian/David Conn
Player sales help save Everton from £22m loss
• Sales included Joleon Lescott's move to Manchester City
• Club's borrowings total £48m, turnover £79m * Everton would have made a £22m loss, rather than the £3.1m they recorded, had they not cleared £19m from selling players including Joleon Lescott to Manchester City, their accounts have revealed. Although the chief executive has dismissed reservations among some fans about Everton's financial position, the figures for the year ending 31 May, 2010, a season in which they finished a disappointing eighth, illustrate how difficult it has become for a club of their financial resources – still at Goodison Park following the refusal of planning permission for the proposed new stadium in Kirkby – to compete in the Premier League. Everton's turnover, £79m, was £10m short of that of Aston Villa, who were Europe's 20th highest-earning club last year, according to Deloitte's football money league. A club's income, and wages paid to players, correlates almost exactly to performance on the pitch; the seven English clubs in the top 20 are the ones which finished above Everton. Manchester United, whom Deloitte estimate turned over £286m, made more than three times Everton's revenue. Income and profitability do not amount to the same thing, however, and City, up to 11th with £125m income, also made a huge loss, £121m, from player signings and a £133m wage bill – more than double Everton's – bankrolled by Sheikh Mansour. One of those players was Lescott, whom City signed for £22m, the top‑priced highlight of transfer dealings on which Everton recorded an overall profit of £19m. Everton's operating expenses, including £17m for the "amortisation" – writing down – of the fees current players were signed for, amounted to almost £97m. There was also £4m interest paid on £48m borrowings. Robert Elstone, the chief executive, and the club's chairman, Bill Kenwright, said they would keep investing to compete against the clubs with vastly greater income. That includes Liverpool, who turned over £185m, more than twice Everton's income. With John Henry hinting Liverpool will stay at Anfield, the faint idea of the two sharing a stadium is fading. Everton have no plans for a new stadium, and a £9m administration block is being built at Goodison by the catering and merchandising partners, which should generate more income. With Goodison, loved as it is, considered outdated and unable to make the money generated by some clubs, Everton are not likely to be bought by a Mansour any time soon. Kenwright, though, continues to hope for deliverance. "I shall continue to work tirelessly for the cause," he said in the annual report. www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/feb/10/everton-accounts-joleon-lescott-manchester-city
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Feb 10, 2011 17:12:34 GMT
Impressive stuff rolands ;D. Your losses are so vast you have to sell your best players to your opponents.
'Team building', I think they call it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rolands59 on Feb 11, 2011 13:28:24 GMT
Impressive stuff rolands ;D. Your losses are so vast you have to sell your best players to your opponents. 'Team building', I think they call it. Hey Mr. Ingham, I was born in the day time but it wasn't yesterday ;D HOWARD, Cahill, Baines, would be Everton's best players though I will admit they should be ashamed of themselves the way they STIFFED Dubai City on that Lescott deal |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Feb 11, 2011 15:50:02 GMT
The trouble with players is that they earn so much for themselves and so little for their Clubs.
It's a sobering thought that having run up debts of nearly £50 million, the players performances are now so uneconomic they're now responsible for losses at a rate of nearly half the Club's total debt in a single season.
Why? It isn't as if all the wonder boys are actually WINNING anything, is it?
Everton clearly don't know what's going on, so can you put them straight, rolands? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by rolands59 on Feb 12, 2011 13:29:07 GMT
If they don't, then may The Good Lord have mercy on the rest of them Mr. I |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Feb 13, 2011 17:22:53 GMT
Except Crawley Town, of course, rolands  . Never quite sure how it is supposed to work, to be honest. A Club isn't successful and it isn't making money, so it hasn't any money to invest in the playing squad. Learn the game? And discover your own limitations? Don't be stupid. You just borrow the money. Before, you were losing money, but now you're losing more. But your results improve, so the Clubs which were more successful and earned more money are forced to spend more to restore the differential they enjoyed based on talent. Or based on more talent, anyway. they do, of course, because relative failure follows relative success like night follows day in football. So you're back where you began. Except the round of heavy spending which your Club initiated makes it harder to sign the sort of players you need now that your rivals have upped the ante themselves. And the fact that you never took the trouble to learn the game, or had the honesty to own up to your own limitations, means you're backing your own lack of judgement with even less money to spare than before. Even as the gap between a Club like yours and the Clubs at the top gets bigger. So QPR, for example, have spent, say, £50 million over and above what the Club brings in. While the Champions League teams, where Mr Briatore booked QPR a place not so long ago, have spent around £2 billion more than they bring in. Nothing else changes, though. The players don't get any better - even the much vaunted foreigners. Once again, for I don't know how many competitions in a row, only one country won the World Cup. But how many of that huge herd of losers came back to England to provide another four years of overpriced master classes in losing to 'investors' only too willing to pay them to do so. Better, they even achieve failure for the Clubs in question. So at what point did we start fooling ourselves that a so-called business is an institution where the credulous borrow money from the rapacious in order to achieve higher costs, bigger losses, and even less success than they enjoyed before they entered the exclusive community of clowns called the Premier League. It isn't just Everton, but they're a good place to start. Don't think I'm being critical here, rolands, old interlocutor  Far from it. Just asking. |
|
|
|
Post by rolands59 on Feb 13, 2011 18:47:26 GMT
;D Since you ask, over here in the bastion of capitalism Mr. I the NFL owners are getting ready to put a strangle hold on the goose laying the golden eggs in an effort to get an even bigger share of the profits off the players Yes I did say profits The Man Utd. & Aston Villa owners are part of the crowd and baseball's John Henry(Red Sox & Liverpool) isn't in the EPL to lose money either So I guess I've answered your question with a question ie. are these folks REALLY losing money or is it like when them on Wall Street or Detroit's car makers "lose" money  If you and I lose money there's a good chance we'll starve out on the street, when the folks we're speaking about lose, they drive around in Rolls Royce's and eat caviar  What am I missing Mr. I  |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Feb 13, 2011 23:29:32 GMT
They're not losing their own money, rolands. If they were, the losses would appear in the 'investors'' accounts.
They don't. So the losses are the Clubs. And if the losses are the Clubs', the money must be the Clubs' too.
It isn't the 'investors' who are risking THEIR money to make money for the Clubs at football. It's the Clubs who are risking theirs to make money for the investors on share deals, property deals and moneylending.
That's why the 'investors' all arrive wealthy and leave wealthy. And it's why the Clubs get deeper and deeper into debt.
|
|
|
|
Post by rolands59 on Feb 14, 2011 13:50:30 GMT
Well Mr. I, looks like we still agree it's a sad state of affairs but we seem to differ a little on if there's any good players/deals around How folks like Aquilani, Lescott, Torres & Carroll sell for what they did and then Deuce Dempsey & Charlie Adam sell for what they did, to me is the difference from somebody doing a good job with other people's money and another just flushing that money down the toilet I read where Man Utd. owners turned down $2.5 BILLION offered by some Qatar folks That's Dallas Cowboys or New York Yankees type money, Glazer owns the Tampa Bay Bucs. People that own the Bucs turning down Cowboys money for a team, proof positive that some are mighty happy with that ole status quo
|
|
.
Far from it.
What am I missing Mr. I 