The Price Of Football.... Burnley

[THEWELLERNUT70]

https://mobile.twitter.com/KieranMaguir ... 10017?s=07

I've just seen this on tw*itter. May be of some interest

[aggi]

Bear in mind that the £34m referenced is at June 2018 so quite a bit out of date.

[FactualFrank]

Annotation 2020-01-14 121622.png (26.84 KiB) Viewed 4279 times

[BOYSIE31]

61 million in the bank plus add the sales of heaton and Vokes and the incomings of jay and Pieters makes for a healthy balance and some wages knocked off as well

[houseboy]

All this doesn't add up to much when you look at what is happening currently on the pitch, unless you want to support a company with a decent balance sheet, but then you could go and support Microsoft.

Funny thing that, I thought we were in it for the football...seems not.

[aggi]

61 million in the bank plus add the sales of heaton and Vokes and the incomings of jay and Pieters makes for a healthy balance and some wages knocked off as well

If you're going to take the £27m we're owed by other clubs you need to knock off the £13.5m that we owe to other clubs.

[dandeclaret]

And should the worst happen, what is the annual shortfall to cover wages and operating expenses when in the championship?

[randomclaret2]

Staying in the Premier League is vital ...the club must try everything to ensure we are not relegated

[TVC15]

And should the worst happen, what is the annual shortfall to cover wages and operating expenses when in the championship?

Depends on who leaves / stays and on what relegation clauses we have.
Our last wage bill was also made up of around £20m of bonuses for our high league position. If we go down the bonuses will largely disappear.
We could also have a chunk of money coming in if we do lose any of our key players - you would think we may lose at least a couple.
We also employ a lot of non playing staff now and I guess we would cut our cloth accordingly in this area / across all our operating costs where possible.
We’ve been relegated a couple of times in last 10 years and whilst things have changed a lot in terms of the TV money under the current board I wouldn’t expect their strategy to change much.

[Leisure]

All this doesn't add up to much when you look at what is happening currently on the pitch, unless you want to support a company with a decent balance sheet, but then you could go and support Microsoft.

Funny thing that, I thought we were in it for the football...seems not.

But without some money in the bank if we go down then there might not be any football!

[TVC15]

All this doesn't add up to much when you look at what is happening currently on the pitch, unless you want to support a company with a decent balance sheet, but then you could go and support Microsoft.

Funny thing that, I thought we were in it for the football...seems not.

At least Microsoft know how to do transfer WINDOWS.

[houseboy]

But without some money in the bank if we go down then there might not be any football!

I think there would be. When you look at how many teams get relegated and how many have wound up in severe difficulty it's not that many really. People always point to Bolton and Sunderland and to a lesser extent Rovers and so on but what about the teams who go down and have no problems at all. WBA are a case in point but also Huddersfield (no great shakes on the pitch but not in any problems as far as I am aware).

Far too much is made I think about money. But that's just my opinion.

[houseboy]

At least Microsoft know how to do transfer WINDOWS.

Nice one...really.

[Chester Perry]

I think there would be. When you look at how many teams get relegated and how many have wound up in severe difficulty it's not that many really. People always point to Bolton and Sunderland and to a lesser extent Rovers and so on but what about the teams who go down and have no problems at all. WBA are a case in point but also Huddersfield (no great shakes on the pitch but not in any problems as far as I am aware).

Far too much is made I think about money. But that's just my opinion.

you think that West Brom don't have any financial problems?

[Funkydrummer]

At least Microsoft know how to do transfer WINDOWS.

Gerroff

[houseboy]

you think that West Brom don't have any financial problems?

Whatever their problems may or may not be they are not doing too shabby on the pitch...where it matters.

[dsr]

I think there would be. When you look at how many teams get relegated and how many have wound up in severe difficulty it's not that many really. People always point to Bolton and Sunderland and to a lesser extent Rovers and so on but what about the teams who go down and have no problems at all. WBA are a case in point but also Huddersfield (no great shakes on the pitch but not in any problems as far as I am aware).

Far too much is made I think about money. But that's just my opinion.

The teams that go down and don't have financial problems are the ones who haven't spent all their cash on trying to stop up. QED.

[ashtonlongsider]

If those figures have any substance, congrats to Mike Garlick and the board for keeping an eye on the bigger picture.

[TVC15]

I think there would be. When you look at how many teams get relegated and how many have wound up in severe difficulty it's not that many really. People always point to Bolton and Sunderland and to a lesser extent Rovers and so on but what about the teams who go down and have no problems at all. WBA are a case in point but also Huddersfield (no great shakes on the pitch but not in any problems as far as I am aware).

Far too much is made I think about money. But that's just my opinion.

Not so sure about that Houseboy.
The list is of ex prem clubs who are in financial difficulties now or have been is a lot lot longer than Bolton and Sunderland.

Leeds
Fulham
Cardiff
Sheff Wed (a few more years ago)
QPR
Portsmouth
Leicester (went into administration)
Bradford
Ipswich
Charlton
Notts Forest
Wigan (have a look at what they were losing a month up until recently)
Swindon
Coventry

I’ve probably missed some too.
My old role meant looking after a lot of football clubs from a banking point of view and I know what a mess many of the clubs got in either trying to get to the Premier League or being relegated from the league but with a level of debt or wage bill that was not sustainable in the lower leagues.

Some manage to bounce back by going bust and then finding new investors - Leicester a prime example. What they did was disgraceful when they built their new ground - the main builder went bust on the back of it with lots of redundancies from the money owed to them by Leicester whilst the football club carried on paying players like Muzzy Izzett £30k a week (a lot of money back then) because of the unique football creditors rule.
They then get lucky with new owners and the rest is history...but as you can see from the list for some clubs the road back is a lot longer !

[Chester Perry]

TVC you can add Villa, Middlesbrough, Derby and Swansea and people should also have a closer look at West Brom and Norwich also not all that convinced by Huddersfield - Blackpool of course was a car crash of poor management

[summitclaret]

The teams that go down and don't have financial problems are the ones who haven't spent all their cash on trying to stop up. QED.

Precisely. So we should have spent some of ours last August then? I mean more than a net £3m.

[triadclaret]

Hopefully not too late on this
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 3242710017 Keiran Maguire The Price of Football Twitter. That link looks crocked. Search

[Vegas Claret]

been mentioned a couple of times already, on the money thread and on it's own thread - still interesting though

[triadclaret]

Thanks VC. Searched Price of Football. Didn't see it. Next AshevilleClaret will be along!!!! Since we're all that's up.....

[houseboy]

The teams that go down and don't have financial problems are the ones who haven't spent all their cash on trying to stop up. QED.

Absolutely, no argument with that, but there is being careful and there is being over-cautious and I think we are probably erring on the latter mate. But what do I know, what do any of us know. All I am sure of is that the money in the PL is out of all proportion to reality and unless things change it will kill football as we know it because the lower leagues are already feeling it, there is no 'trickle down' of the money, it is all log jammed at the top. I spend half my time being proud of being part of it and the other half hating the whole bloody edifice.

[houseboy]

Not so sure about that Houseboy.
The list is of ex prem clubs who are in financial difficulties now or have been is a lot lot longer than Bolton and Sunderland.

Leeds
Fulham
Cardiff
Sheff Wed (a few more years ago)
QPR
Portsmouth
Leicester (went into administration)
Bradford
Ipswich
Charlton
Notts Forest
Wigan (have a look at what they were losing a month up until recently)
Swindon
Coventry

I’ve probably missed some too.
My old role meant looking after a lot of football clubs from a banking point of view and I know what a mess many of the clubs got in either trying to get to the Premier League or being relegated from the league but with a level of debt or wage bill that was not sustainable in the lower leagues.

Some manage to bounce back by going bust and then finding new investors - Leicester a prime example. What they did was disgraceful when they built their new ground - the main builder went bust on the back of it with lots of redundancies from the money owed to them by Leicester whilst the football club carried on paying players like Muzzy Izzett £30k a week (a lot of money back then) because of the unique football creditors rule.
They then get lucky with new owners and the rest is history...but as you can see from the list for some clubs the road back is a lot longer !

I bow to your experience bud. So what is the future going to be like for football in general? Do you think that the stupid money in the PL will have to stop - will the bubble have to burst? Football clubs historically have never made money, there was a time when most were in debt, and that too had to change, but where are we heading now? Transfer fees cannot keep rising so way above inflation, the same with players wages, it surely has to stop at some point doesn't it.

[CaptJohn]

I think we Clarets do OK on the price of our football. If you're a ST holder, "like wot I is", it's a pretty good deal TBH. Prem football on the cheap. However the game as a whole is downright mad from a financial point of view and I understand the dilemma of the board. Do they gamble on staying up with a couple of expensive signings or stick to fiscal prudence and plan for life outside of the Prem. Sure it would be nice to have a couple of big signings but we tried that with DD and Crouchy and neither were a success. I for one have no issue with going back to the basics of when I first started supporting the club in the 60s. The model then was to produce our own talent and make a big sale each year to balance the books. It broke my heart when we sold Willie Morgan and Ralphy Coates but I got over it. Barnfield is part of the long term plan IMHO.
Market forces are something we can't control but we can play the game and I for one see us going back to the future, if you know what I mean

[TVC15]

I bow to your experience bud. So what is the future going to be like for football in general? Do you think that the stupid money in the PL will have to stop - will the bubble have to burst? Football clubs historically have never made money, there was a time when most were in debt, and that too had to change, but where are we heading now? Transfer fees cannot keep rising so way above inflation, the same with players wages, it surely has to stop at some point doesn't it.

As a Bank we lost a lot of money in the football sector and eventually we pulled out completely. But for years it was a big ego trip for our directors and executives who loved the status of being associated with clubs like Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Leeds, Celtic, and lots of others who banked with us. I had to go in the box at Liverpool and Man City many times - great at start...free booze / great food etc but novelty soon wore off...though it was funny seeing City when they were sh-ite....I once got spat on by an angry mob of fans going back to my car as they were protesting against Peter Swales and thought I was one of the directors !! Could tell you a few stories about Chelsea under Ken Bates too - a nastier more obnoxious bloke you could not meet and a proper basket case of a club financially before he sold.

Anyway I digress !! I said a few years ago I thought the bubble would burst on the TV money but it didn’t - infact it just kept on increasing every deal so who knows where the ceiling is. The thing that might eventually make it stop going up is the way people watch TV with streaming and the likes of You Tube, Amazon, Facebook who have the potential because of their size to mess things up for Sky.

The finances of the clubs in the Premier League are actually healthier than ever if you look at it from a profitability point of view. Back in the time when I was talking it was nothing like this and most of them lost money every year and were often on the verge of bankruptcy...and lots of clubs went into receivership.
The numbers now bear no resemblance to 20 years ago - it’s night and day. Not just profitability wise but look at the values of the clubs now compared to back then. Clubs that were worth a few millions now worth hundreds of millions and a few billions - all 92 clubs put together were hardly worth one billion 25 / 30 years ago !

The real problem is I said - chasing the dream of the Premier League or being relegated after chasing the dream and burdening yourself with debt or subsidies from owners who then decide they have enough of the ego trip.

You can criticise Burnley all you want about not spending money or not having a proper go at developing or even surviving...but the way they have decided to go about things for me is the right way in the position our owners are in themselves financially. None of them are prepared to subsidise the club to the tune of £50m / £100m or more so they are left with 2 choices. First is do it like we have and the second is spend what we have and subsidise this by borrowing money from a Bank....and saddling the club with debt.

Now you can plan for relegation by things like relegation clauses in players contracts, cutting your operational costs and selling players but what can you do about a £150m loan hanging round your neck ? You have zero chance of investing back in the team and it just becomes a vicious spiral as you fall down the league, crowds and sponsorship go down dramatically too etc. All your parachute payments do is cover your debt and the wages which might be lower than they were but still too high for the lower divisions. For many the only option ends up being going bust and starting again....massive clubs like Leeds and Sheff Wednesday went bust with debts that were only a bit more than what we paid for Ben Gibson !!

Sorry for the long reply - a shorter version would be it’s going to hell in a hand cart !!!

[houseboy]

Good post mate and thanks for that. I haven't quoted you for obvious reasons. Interesting read though and I like your summing up. I think we totally agree on that.

[claretblue]

Everton announce record losses of £111.8m for year to June 2019

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51114007

[tim_noone]

And no doubt everyone with a dislike of soulless bowls will be using their 6000 points to attend the new ground when built.......yes its early I dont do mornings!

[aggi]

I bow to your experience bud. So what is the future going to be like for football in general? Do you think that the stupid money in the PL will have to stop - will the bubble have to burst? Football clubs historically have never made money, there was a time when most were in debt, and that too had to change, but where are we heading now? Transfer fees cannot keep rising so way above inflation, the same with players wages, it surely has to stop at some point doesn't it.

The huge TV money is actually levelling the playing field somewhat at the moment (once you get in the Premier League).

However, personally I think the bubble will continue but only for half a dozen clubs or so.

The next step is to unpackage the TV rights. Rather than have collective Premier League rights each team will be able to sell their own rights (maybe only internationally and not domestically). Man Utd, Liverpool, etc will earn loads of money and the "big six" will move further off into the distance with streaming season tickets, deals with Amazon, etc.

The rest of the Premier League clubs will end up with revenue levels between the Premier League and the Championship with a much smaller gap between the two. I imagine it will eventually fill with teams with big crowds or big benefactors with clubs such as ours much more likely to struggle.

[houseboy]

The huge TV money is actually levelling the playing field somewhat at the moment (once you get in the Premier League).

However, personally I think the bubble will continue but only for half a dozen clubs or so.

The next step is to unpackage the TV rights. Rather than have collective Premier League rights each team will be able to sell their own rights (maybe only internationally and not domestically). Man Utd, Liverpool, etc will earn loads of money and the "big six" will move further off into the distance with streaming season tickets, deals with Amazon, etc.

The rest of the Premier League clubs will end up with revenue levels between the Premier League and the Championship with a much smaller gap between the two. I imagine it will eventually fill with teams with big crowds or big benefactors with clubs such as ours much more likely to struggle.

It does all look a bit grim for the game in general doesn't it. I think the time is coming when League Two and maybe even some League One clubs will have to go part time. In the scheme of things we do well but also look at Stanley, how the hell do they survive and compete in League One with their level of income, but they do. I go there sometimes and it is a very enjoyable couple of hours but it would be an awful shame if clubs like Stanley could no longer survive. Something pretty awful is happening to football in this country and most of it seems to be caused by money (and the lack of it).

[tim_noone]

It does all look a bit grim for the game in general doesn't it. I think the time is coming when League Two and maybe even some League One clubs will have to go part time. In the scheme of things we do well but also look at Stanley, how the hell do they survive and compete in League One with their level of income, but they do. I go there sometimes and it is a very enjoyable couple of hours but it would be an awful shame if clubs like Stanley could no longer survive. Something pretty awful is happening to football in this country and most of it seems to be caused by money (and the lack of it).

Always a good day at Stanley ..they dont have delusions of grandeur. It's a game of football at the end of the day..nothing more nothing less!

[TVC15]

West Ham fans and being charged nearly £60 by United tonight for the cup replay - pure greed. Just heard a city fan also say that United charge nearly £8 for a pint of lager !!

And Jim White from Sky who is an elitist snob when it comes to football as he is only interested in being seen with the big massive clubs to boost his ego has just been saying that he thinks that FA Cup replays need to be banned as there are too many games. Luckily most people in football don’t agree with him as for the smaller clubs it’s their big and only chance for a pay day. Look at Rochdale last night.
Clinton Morrison said at the back end of his career he was at Exeter and they got a draw at Liverpool and the money they earned kept the club going for 2 years !

The worst thing about football in the last couple of decades is the gap that has opened up between the Premier League and the other leagues. Not only does it often lead to the ruin of clubs chasing the dream as we have mentioned above but it’s also the lack of support and help these clubs get from the rich big clubs or from football in general.
Football in the country used to be pretty unique in terms of there are at least 4 divisions outside the Premier League where fans follow their local clubs in big numbers and the clubs are so important to their communities. The Premier League is slowly killing that and every decision they make is for the good of themselves and how they can get even more richer and powerful.
Unfortunately it’s too late for this to ever change now - and we are going to see more and more cases like Bury, Bolton, Macclesfield etc.

[ChorltonCharlie]

Football finances are quite simple really at Premier League level.

Most clubs have billionaire backers, so they can afford to break even and still be well run clubs. Worst that happens is that for these clubs if they do get relegated they have a chance of getting back up providing the billionaire backer doesn't get bored, a bit like happened down the road.

Clubs like ours can't risk breaking even. Wages would be such a big cut of that break even spend that relegation is a financial disaster. All budgets need to be based on worst case scenario.

So then for us the question is what's the ratio of expenditure to income? There's a significant amount of fans out there who don't get why we can't break even. The ones that do get it, want us to get what they think is a perfect balance, but without having to deal with any of the realism of the day to day challenges faced by Garlick, Dyche, Rigg, etc. It's really easy to snipe from the sidelines, but it's an incredibly difficult balancing act.

For instance... Our projected income as a PL club for the next 4 years would bee between £400m and £500m. Even break even, that's a maximum with a squad of 20 of £25m per player. That's got to include fees for transfer, wages (4 year contract) and agent. In this day and age it's nothing for a Premier League club. Championship players that could be half decent in the PL would easily eat up that budget. A few years ago, that's the market we were in, but now they're usually no better than what we have. This plays a big part in the challenges mentioned above, and that's a figures on the back of a fag packet break even staying in the Premier League example.

[Sproggy]

Which makes it all the more bizarre that we've blown the best part of 50 million quid over the last few transfer windows on players that haven't made a significant impact on the first team.

[aggi]

Which makes it all the more bizarre that we've blown the best part of 50 million quid over the last few transfer windows on players that haven't made a significant impact on the first team.

It's tough to name a club that has only successes in their transfer dealings though (or even many that have a better success:failure rate than us).

[ChorltonCharlie]

Which makes it all the more bizarre that we've blown the best part of 50 million quid over the last few transfer windows on players that haven't made a significant impact on the first team.

I don't think it is. It just proves how hard it is to improve this side with the kinds of transfer fees we can afford to pay. We've had our fingers burnt, and that will make us even more cautious. Che Adams would be a perfect example. People said we should just have paid the money, but we were looking at a total outlay of getting on for £30m for him. If you're Dyche you have to be convinced that he'll come in and displace Barnes or Wood to pay that, and after what happened with Vydra and how it's gone for Adams it's totally understandable why we didn't.

I'm all for Burnley trying to be a bit more creative to bring in transfers, but there's some pretty strong evidence around why they now find it so difficult to improve the first 11.

[Sproggy]

It's tough to name a club that has only successes in their transfer dealings though (or even many that have a better success:failure rate than us).

Agreed. But our success:failure rate is nil:something over the last 3 windows as far as the first team is concerned (though I'm doing JayRod a bit of a disservice there).

Basically we're messing about at the edges rather than addressing problems. Yes, we need to be creative and yes we are massively dependent on our scouting and the ability of the manager to integrate new signings but we need to stop going down the down the lines of Vydra, Hart, Crouch, Walters, Wells, Gibson, Drinkwater, Lennon etc and start looking for genuine first-teamers with resale potential, even if we end up with fewer of them and pay a bit more. We used to do it, what happened?

I don't care how difficult the market is, even little old Burnley should be able to find younger replacements for Lowton, Westwood and Barnes given the money we make from being in the Premier League.

[dsr]

I don't care how difficult the market is, even little old Burnley should be able to find younger replacements for Lowton, Westwood and Barnes given the money we make from being in the Premier League.

Salah, Aubameyang, Mane, Aguero, Vardy, Sterling, Kane, Hazard, Wilson, Pogba, Lacazette, Sigurdsson, Richarlison, Jiminez, Murray, Son, Firmino, Milivojevic, Perez, Lukaku.

That's the list of players who scored more than Barnes last year. How much did that lost cost? It is very difficult to get an 11 goal a season Premier League striker; most clubs don't have one. Outside the top 6, only Leicester, Everton, Bournemouth, Wolves and Palace had players who scored more than Barnes; and Palace's were all penalties.

[Vegas Claret]

have we signed anyone yet ?

[ClaretAndJew]

Salah, Aubameyang, Mane, Aguero, Vardy, Sterling, Kane, Hazard, Wilson, Pogba, Lacazette, Sigurdsson, Richarlison, Jiminez, Murray, Son, Firmino, Milivojevic, Perez, Lukaku.

That's the list of players who scored more than Barnes last year. How much did that lost cost? It is very difficult to get an 11 goal a season Premier League striker; most clubs don't have one. Outside the top 6, only Leicester, Everton, Bournemouth, Wolves and Palace had players who scored more than Barnes; and Palace's were all penalties.

So over half the teams in the PL have strikers who scored more than 11 goals.

Should be reasonable for us to want that too then.

[Vegas Claret]

to be fair, you could stick Salah up front for us and I doubt he would get more than 15 given the way we play and the amount of chances we don't create - we don't need strikers, we need a good midfield to provide the strikers and that should be more easily achieved

[Dark Cloud]

Saving our cash to spend on being competitive when we're in the Championship is (I agree) ONE way yo go forward, but spending some BEFORE going into the Championship and maybe averting that eventuality is another way to go. Both are gambles and both could end up in money down the drain, but personally I fancy one over the other tbh.

[dsr]

So over half the teams in the PL have strikers who scored more than 11 goals.

Should be reasonable for us to want that too then.

The argument "Liverpool can afford Salah, why can't we" is a bit thin. The "big 6" have got virtually all the top strikers. Leicester have Vardy, who is possibly the only top class striker playing outside the "big 6". And beyond them, Bournemouth have Wilson (14 goals), Everton have Sigurdsson and Richarlison (13 goals each), Wolves have Jiminez (13), Brigthon have Murray (13), Newcastle have Perez (12).

Yes, you can argue that if Everton can have two strikers with more than 12 goals, why can't we have one. I'll let you work that one out for yourself. But basically, strikers who can score that many and still remain within our price range AND our wage structure - it's not a trivial job to find one.

Fulham aren't on that list; nor West Ham, Watford, Cardiff. Clubs that weren't afraid to splash the cash, and yet didn't find it easy to get a top striker.

[jrgbfc]

I read somewhere last night from a respectable news source that Derby are paying Wayne Rooney 90 grand a week!! If true it just proves how ridiculous the money in football is now. No doubt his wage is heavily subsidised by the betting company that sponsor Derby, think its 32 red or something.

[aggi]

Saving our cash to spend on being competitive when we're in the Championship is (I agree) ONE way yo go forward, but spending some BEFORE going into the Championship and maybe averting that eventuality is another way to go. Both are gambles and both could end up in money down the drain, but personally I fancy one over the other tbh.

It's not just to be competitive in the Championship, it's also to simply survive in the championship. When we go down it's pretty unlikely that we'll have any big money backers to fund us so it's use the money we've built up whilst in the Premier League or have a firesale and try and avoid administration.

[aggi]

to be fair, you could stick Salah up front for us and I doubt he would get more than 15 given the way we play and the amount of chances we don't create - we don't need strikers, we need a good midfield to provide the strikers and that should be more easily achieved

By coincidence I read an article today on the Expected Goals of the Premier League strikers and Chris Wood's was higher than Salah's suggesting he's had better chances
https://www.football365.com/news/who-sh ... ague-goals

[Vegas Claret]

By coincidence I read an article today on the Expected Goals of the Premier League strikers and Chris Wood's was higher than Salah's suggesting he's had better chances
https://www.football365.com/news/who-sh ... ague-goals

jeez, that makes it even worse for Wood Bonkers stat !