Record breaking profit in 2017/18 for the Clarets:

https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/new ... BQ.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I could have sworn we were told it was going to be close to £60m...

Burnley fans have a lot to be thankfull for IMO of course . Great news!

Pre-tax figure of £45m.

So when added to this year's likely profits we could be going down with circ 100m in thr bank after paying a fortune in tax and with a understrength midfield. If so mission accomplished?

Ps I have not yet read he accounts.

wages up £20 million from 2016/17 figure and will have gone up again this season

£81 million in wages. Woah!

summitclaret wrote:So when added to this year's likely profits we could be going down with circ 100m in thr bank after paying a fortune in tax and with a understrength midfield. If so mission accomplished?

Ps I have not yet read he accounts.

Ps You shouldn't you prove all the time you don't understand them.

Compared to the combined losses of £158m of the 3 promoted clubs (price of football on Twitter).........although no doubt some UTC posters will be currently logging on to voice their unhappiness.

Out of interest, what was the wage bill?

Wage figure includes end of season bonus pay. As you can imagine, that’s likely to have been very high last season.

NL Claret wrote:Compared to the combined losses of £158m of the 3 promoted clubs (price of football on Twitter).........although no doubt some UTC posters will be currently logging on to voice their unhappiness.

Out of interest, what was the wage bill?

wage bill was £81 million

NL Claret wrote:
Out of interest, what was the wage bill?

£81m including bonuses.

Are the previous year's profit included in this year's turnover or do we bank that separately somewhere?

SGr wrote:Pre-tax figure of £45m.

The estimated Profit of £58m was based on a Wage bill of £70m.

The actual Wage bill of near £82m represents a staggering increase of 33% on the previous financial year.

Other than that, the headline figures are in line with the estimate on the Money Tree thread.

And what was that as a percentage of overall income?

Even with parachute payments that doesn't appear to be sustainable in the EFL.

If we do go down it's to be hoping there's some serious salary reduction clauses or we will see our finances disappear rather quickly.

NL Claret wrote:And what was that as a percentage of overall income?

Even with parachute payments that doesn't appear to be sustainable in the EFL.

Wouldn't be sustainable in the EFL but most of the players would get reduced wages if we were to be relegated.

Royboyclaret wrote:The estimated Profit of £58m was based on a Wage bill of £70m.

The actual Wage bill of near £82m represents a staggering increase of 33% on the previous financial year.

Other than that, the headline figures are in line with the estimate on the Money Tree thread.

Which is why it is always better to judge once you see the figures rather than guess what they will be and criticise the club for the figures you have arrived at.

When's the parade?

I wonder what the difference in the total wages would have been if we’d have finished 17th?

In line with the prize money difference?

If the highly artificial way of reporting player sales and purchases is put back to the way it used to be - player sales are income, player purchases are expenses - we get:

Profit on trading, net of tax = £35m
Receipts from selling players = £35m
Cost of buying players = £43m

Net profit (old accounting rules) = £27m.

Under the old rules, if you sell Gray for £15m and buy Wood for £15m, you have broken even. Under the rules as they are applied now, you make £10m profit this year and £5m loss next year and the year after.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:I wonder what the difference in the total wages would have been if we’d have finished 17th?

In line with the prize money difference?

16m prize money difference, wages increased by 20m, not all will be bonus related.

We are pretty close to the stage where we can't actually afford to pay our squad premier league wages, even with TV money.

Relegation is just a matter of time if that continues, and there is nothing we can do about without putting the club at an unacceptable level of risk.

People will use the £36m as a stick to beat the club with, but we'll be skint one season after relegation, even after playing it relatively 'safe'.

As a club with around 15,000 fans, how much above £81m would you like our wage bill to go?

Lancasterclaret wrote:We are pretty close to the stage where we can't actually afford to pay our squad premier league wages, even with TV money.

Relegation is just a matter of time if that continues, and there is nothing we can do about without putting the club at an unacceptable level of risk.

The two big sales allowed us to post the profit. That's clearly how the club will operate in the future, player sales to boost things. That was the road we went down in the 1960s of course but we then relied (and I mean relied) on players coming through the youth system so eventually it all fell apart.

Shows just how sensible we need to be in transfer windows.

Cash at bank and in hand -£34.4M - made my day.

SGr wrote:Wage figure includes end of season bonus pay. As you can imagine, that’s likely to have been very high last season.

Wonder how much they amounted too? Presuming that we have an approach where we don't pay as much as other clubs on weekly salaries but we offer decent bonus payments as an additional incentive

Lot of talk about player sales being the driving factor behind the profit, and concern over the wage bill.

I’ll reiterate then, that signing younger players with sell on potential should always be this club’s objective.

ADDITIONALLY: How many people still think Jay Rodriguez would’ve been a smart investment?

A comparison of wages.

Huddersfield £62.6m
Brighton £78m
Watford £86m
Stoke £94m
Bournemouth £102m

Man Utd £296m

SGr wrote:Lot of talk about player sales being the driving factor behind the profit, and concern over the wage bill.

I’ll reiterate then, that signing younger players with sell on potential should always be this club’s objective.

ADDITIONALLY: How many people still think Jay Rodriguez would’ve been a smart investment?

You can't have a first team squad of younger players but I do agree totally that signing younger players is the way to go and it is the way the club have been heading. At first team level, we bough both Keane and Gray who were sold on, as shown in these accounts, but the first team squad also includes players such as Pope, Tarkowski and Taylor who would now all be worth considerably more than they have cost us.

But, besides first team players, we also need to be securing good young players below that level and that's what we are clearly doing. You don't need to bring many through to the first team to make that system fully worthwhile. I've no idea how much it costs now to run the academy but if it can produce an occasional player to step up into the first team while producing other players that can be sold on, that, for me, is the way to go.

As for Jay Rod, if the speculation is true that the manager wanted him then he'd have been a good signing. I think he's 29 now so doesn't come into the young player to sell on category any longer.

Lets not forget, 80m wages relates to finishing 7th and the increase in wages will relate to the increase in prize money. So if we finish 17th this year then bonus' will be lower as well.

I presume cash in bank/in hand won't include the amount clubs still owe us for transfers (£27.8 million) or the amount we owe other clubs (£13.3 million)?

ClaretTony wrote:You can't have a first team squad of younger players but I do agree totally that signing younger players is the way to go and it is the way the club have been heading. At first team level, we bough both Keane and Gray who were sold on, as shown in these accounts, but the first team squad also includes players such as Pope, Tarkowski and Taylor who would now all be worth considerably more than they have cost us.

But, besides first team players, we also need to be securing good young players below that level and that's what we are clearly doing. You don't need to bring many through to the first team to make that system fully worthwhile. I've no idea how much it costs now to run the academy but if it can produce an occasional player to step up into the first team while producing other players that can be sold on, that, for me, is the way to go.

Agreed. The youth team is a complete success if only a couple of young players make it. I’m very happy with our progress on that level.

Also agree with regards to the team of young players - I certainly wouldn’t expect a side of 21 year olds. We need experience, that goes without saying. Just need feel we need more balance in that respect, we do have some players with sell on potential now, but I feel we could do with more.

SGr wrote:we do have some players with sell on potential now, but I feel we could do with more.

A club like ours could always do with more but I do like the current policy of strengthening the u23 and u18 squads wherever possible. Some will come in and not be good enough but there are some promising players in there right now.

@KieranMaguirre does his breakdown thing

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 7046249473" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ClaretTony wrote:You can't have a first team squad of younger players but I do agree totally that signing younger players is the way to go and it is the way the club have been heading. At first team level, we bough both Keane and Gray who were sold on, as shown in these accounts, but the first team squad also includes players such as Pope, Tarkowski and Taylor who would now all be worth considerably more than they have cost us.

But, besides first team players, we also need to be securing good young players below that level and that's what we are clearly doing. You don't need to bring many through to the first team to make that system fully worthwhile. I've no idea how much it costs now to run the academy but if it can produce an occasional player to step up into the first team while producing other players that can be sold on, that, for me, is the way to go.

As for Jay Rod, if the speculation is true that the manager wanted him then he'd have been a good signing. I think he's 29 now so doesn't come into the young player to sell on category any longer.

Yes I see agree, the signing of Peter Crouch really shows that we are committed to bringing in younger players with a re sale value

Cleveleys_claret wrote:Yes I see agree, the signing of Peter Crouch really shows that we are committed to bringing in younger players with a re sale value

Yep that 5 year deal we gave him is going to hold us back.

Cleveleys_claret wrote:Yes I see agree, the signing of Peter Crouch really shows that we are committed to bringing in younger players with a re sale value

What a ridiculous and stupid comment but probably to be expected. Why single out one player from the whole squad of first team, u23 and u18? Oh I know why, it suits your agenda.

To be fair, its a new record of 35 sensible posts before one that makes you question whether humanity really should be allowed exist.

Tall Paul wrote:I could have sworn we were told it was going to be close to £60m...

I predicted £50m pre-tax, only £5m out. (Although I did forecast £75m in Net Assets which was only £1.5m out).

A fair few people under-estimated the wages and player depreciation. I suspect that the heavy bonus bias in the accounts threw the wage guesses off.

What I'd take from this is that we still have headroom in the wage structure if we wanted to bump them up further (which will have to be considered next season if we stay up). I can't see that the 18/19 wages will be much different from 17/18 given that the bonuses are likely way down and we haven't improved the team.

We also have £75m in assets including a lot of cash (plus another £10m or so in trade debtors less creditors). We're hitting the point where the rainy day fund doesn't need to go up by much more (again, if we stay up).

Cleveleys_claret wrote:Yes I see agree, the signing of Peter Crouch really shows that we are committed to bringing in younger players with a re sale value

If you don't understand the signing of Peter Crouch then I'd advise you not to get involved in further footballing discussions. Unless, of course, you do understand the signing of Crouch but want to use it just to have a go at the club, regardless?

Goodclaret wrote:If you don't understand the signing of Peter Crouch then I'd advise you not to get involved in further footballing discussions. Unless, of course, you do understand the signing of Crouch but want to use it just to have a go at the club, regardless?

he has a long list of posts proving he understands very little

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: he has a long list of posts proving he understands very little

I know. I shouldn't have bitten but when you read something so ridiculous it's hard not to have a nibble

ClaretTony wrote:Wouldn't be sustainable in the EFL but most of the players would get reduced wages if we were to be relegated.

I’d have thought/hoped that all of the players & coaching staff would be happy to be on reduced wages if relegated.

We saw what happened at Sunderland with Rodwell refusing to reduce and happy to sit back and take the wage and look where he ended up

wilks_bfc wrote:I’d have thought/hoped that all of the players & coaching staff would be happy to be on reduced wages if relegated.

We saw what happened at Sunderland with Rodwell refusing to reduce and happy to sit back and take the wage and look where he ended up

Sunderland agreed to the deal - a well managed club with their history would not have done - these are the things we never hear about - we would have walked away from such a stance I have no doubt about that

Please name me 3 players who we have signed in the last 3 years that have a respectable selling on fee? I mean like a Keane type of profit. When we have signed possibly 15/20 players, it shows we really arent committed to doing what we are saying

Pope, Taylor, Gibson and I'm assuming all the youth players.

Next!

Chester Perry wrote:@KieranMaguirre does his breakdown thing

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 7046249473" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Quite a good breakdown, looking forward to @swissramble's breakdown. We are owed 28m from other clubs on top of the 34m in the bank.

No doubt we are in a fantastic position, and the envy of loads of clubs and I'm very grateful for that, but we need to be 100% spot on in everything each season to maintain our PL status.

Thats going to be a real struggle.

Lancasterclaret wrote:No doubt we are in a fantastic position, and the envy of loads of clubs and I'm very grateful for that, but we need to be 100% spot on in everything each season to maintain our PL status.

Thats going to be a real struggle.

It is about getting more right than wrong and the current set-up has that - naturally everyone would like it to be more than we do but we are high achievers on this measure