Nathan Ake to Bournmouth £20m

[Sidney1st]

Not true at all, I haven't criticized the club at all. Infact quite the opposite since the summer after the last relegation. They deserve huge credit for backing Dyche. I don't understand why defending another team is classed as bashing your own but ok. It all boils down to certain posters hating Howe so bashing Bournemouth at every opportunity even ignoring the facts.

I'm not a Howe hater, I appreciate everything he did for the first team and fully understand why he left.

As for ignoring facts, that's your specialist area in regards to football finances.

[Sidney1st]

Let's look at this another way.

A club gets £100 million for this last season.

Say their wages are £70 million.

That leaves them £30 million for everything else including transfers.

Now transfers are usually paid over the length of a contract.
Ibe, for example, cost £16 million.
I don't know the length of his contract but lets assume its 4yrs, meaning £4million a year to Liverpool.

That leaves them £26 million from that TV deal.
Take away signing on and agents fees from that transfer, lets round it down to £25 million as a guess.

Now that's just the one transfers, try multiplying it by 3-4.
Chuck on additional running costs like academies, routine maintenance of ground, food bills etc and that money soon disappears.

Now I don't know what other revenue Bournemouth generate, but 12k tickets won't make much.
They aren't a glamour club so sponsorship deals won't be mega money either, probably similar to ours.

Its easy enough for a club to end up needing to borrow money from somewhere to keep ticking over.

Now you can substitute Bournemouth for another club, Sunderland for example.

[tiger76]

I know you're not a fan of Howe but this is simply untrue.

If Denim decided he wasn't going to give them any more money they could continue exactly as they are. In the championship he subsidised them but now they're in the premier league the TV money more than pays for their transfer dealings. If his money wasn't available they wouldn't be in a huge mess, they'd be in exactly the same position as they are now.

I said on another thread that we could pay half a dozen players 100k a week (way more than Bournemouth pay to anyone) and still make a profit. People just don't realise how much money the tv deal is.

Sure we could fund the 100k a week wages of half a dozen players,not convinced this would do much for our team spirit.Also in the event of relegation without clauses, we could be up s##t creek without a paddle very quickly, if we happened to be lumbered with high wage earners who can't be moved on.

[aggi]

But there's no way Bournemouth could have got the the Prem as quickly as they did without big losses too.

And don't you find it just a bit odd that no-one is using Bournemouth as an example all smaller clubs (such as Bury & Rochdale for example) that it's possible to get to the Prem without breaking the bank.

Agreed, that's why I said in the Championship the owner subsidised them.

Not odd at all, the owner subsidised them but we're not talking about seasons gone by, we're talking about their current spending power.

[Jamesy]

Huddersfield as well - signed Mooy for £10m, close to a deal for a French striker for £11m and close to signing Tom Ince for around £8m. All in the space of a couple of days.

8 Million for Tom Ince just illustrates how ridiculous the Premier League is. Money sloshing about because of Sky money. Poor standard overall in comparison to Europes elite clubs. When a club pay 8 million for an average inconsistent player like Ince hardly anyone bats an eyelid. 8 million FFS!
I personally would love to see the arse drop out of the Premier League to bring the game back to a sensible level. However it isn't going to happen anytime soon with the Sky deals getting bigger and bigger.

[Sidney1st]

Agreed, that's why I said in the Championship the owner subsidised them.

Not odd at all, the owner subsidised them but we're not talking about seasons gone by, we're talking about their current spending power.

Their current spending power will be beyond their means soon enough, see my earlier post.

[Chester Perry]

Isn't the real difference the fact that we don't spend money until we have actually received it (a legacy of getting our fingers burnt over itv Digital)

We are in year 2 of the current 3 year deal following an incredible surge in TV rights after a cycle of stagnation - the bid packs are going out for the next cycle - will that be the same, greater or even less. No one really knows, but I suspect that the big clubs think that the only growth will be in the offshore deals which is why they are campaigning hard to break the equal share.

I can't see how the domestic deal can increase by much without a major new competitor entering the market. BT have shown they do not want more than 2 or 3 packages and sky will not get caught out overbidding for packages no -one else bid for (they could end up colluding together to bring the price down). Also if Sky are blocked from a buyout by FOX where will there money come from. Subscribers are switching to streams and earning proportionately less as austerity and wage stagnation bites yet fundamental and basic living costs continue to rise exponentially

if the next deals are less then a few clubs are going to be in the mire with players on long term big contracts for players the big clubs don't want or no one else can afford can

[bfc1984]

I have nothing against Bournemouth are Eddie,but I hope they do drop this year it's ridiculous what they are spending.They will have a shock back in the championship and the owners will not stay around for long.This lad is a decent footballer but no way is he worth 20m

[WillDanceForChocolat]

I live in Bournemouth, so I have to put up with their fans continually going on about how well they are run. The facts say different. Their last account in July 2016 showed creditors of £153m, including loans owed to their shareholders of £53m.

AFCB fan in interest.

From reports on the accounts, my understanding was that £50 million was owed to the investors and £8 million had been paid back last season. So the investors put up money whilst the club was in the lower leagues to make their budget on a rough par with other clubs at that level - not blow them out of the water as some seem to believe - and once promotion was achieved started paying the investors back.

As I understand it, didn't Burnley do something similar to get their first PL promotion? Since then, the club have been reaping the benefits of parachute payments which, coupled with some excellent management, have meant they've come back up a couple of times and now retained their status.

Anyway, this £153 million creditors figure. Care to point it where that is stated?

[Chester Perry]

See page 10 of the 2016 full Accounts posted 25th April this year

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/comp ... ng-history" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[joey13]

8 Million for Tom Ince just illustrates how ridiculous the Premier League is. Money sloshing about because of Sky money. Poor standard overall in comparison to Europes elite clubs. When a club pay 8 million for an average inconsistent player like Ince hardly anyone bats an eyelid. 8 million FFS!
I personally would love to see the arse drop out of the Premier League to bring the game back to a sensible level. However it isn't going to happen anytime soon with the Sky deals getting bigger and bigger.

8 million for Ince is a good deal bearing in mind how much we paid Derby for Hendrick.

[Sidney1st]

Hendrick will be more influential for us than Ince will be at Huddersfield, barring a miracle.

[Sidney1st]

See page 10 of the 2016 full Accounts posted 25th April this year

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/comp ... ng-history" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think I prefer this page...

Where's yon fella who said they had no debt?

IMG_1851.PNG (339.22 KiB) Viewed 2220 times

[Sidney1st]

IMG_1852.PNG (459.52 KiB) Viewed 2211 times

[Spijed]

8 million for Ince is a good deal bearing in mind how much we paid Derby for Hendrick.

What's Ince ever done at PL level?

[joey13]

What's Ince ever done at PL level?

What had Hendrick done before we bought him ?
At least Ince has had Premier league experience so not sure what your point is .?

[Sidney1st]

Ince had done little at PL level despite two loans.

Hendrick nothing as he'd been at Derby for 5-6 yrs.

We paid what we did for Hendrick and most people will now accept we got a good deal for him as he's grown over the season as he settled.

Ince - lets see how he gets on this time.

[Jamesy]

8 million for Ince is a good deal bearing in mind how much we paid Derby for Hendrick.

Yes we had our pants pulled down with Hendrick but again this illustrates how ridiculous the PL transfer market is. Stupid fees for average players.

[Sidney1st]

Did we have our pants pulled down or am I missing the sarcasm?

[aggi]

I think some people are misunderstanding those accounts a bit, you can't just point at £153m of creditors without also looking at the assets.

For instance that £41m of deferred income, that's probably early season ticket sales and TV money relating to next season which is in part matched up with the £33m in cash they have. That £27m of trade creditors (plus £17m in greater than one year) relates to transfer fees, loan fees, etc. the £15m of trade debtors is the equivalent of what is owed to Bournemouth.

They owe a lot of money to the owners, upwards of £50m. Like us, their owners financed them to get out of the Championship. They financed them to a much greater extent than our owners did though, I think we'd all agree that it was pretty unlikely that they would have got promoted without that (but on the flipside, a whole variety of other teams were doing the same). At least they are a little more sensible now though rather than going down the Portsmouth/QPR route.

[ClaretTony]

Yes we had our pants pulled down with Hendrick but again this illustrates how ridiculous the PL transfer market is. Stupid fees for average players.

A fee of short of £10 million for Hendrick doesn't suggest we had our pants pulled down at all.

[Royboyclaret]

The odd thing is aggi, that £46m of the £53m owed to the owners resulted from loans during their first season in the Premier League.

Suggesting perhaps that the funding was for recruitment in the PL prior to the TV money arriving, as opposed to finance to enable them to exit the Championship.

Nevertheless, contrary to suggestions higher up this thread, they are now a profitable business without any further financial intervention from Demin and co.

[Steve1956]

I still think Bournemouth will do a Portsmouth and be in the bottom division round about season 25/26 its a cert.

[Steve1956]

Yes we had our pants pulled down with Hendrick but again this illustrates how ridiculous the PL transfer market is. Stupid fees for average players.

Hendrick will prove this coming season what ever we paid for him was worth it,why is he so underated by our support?

[Cleveleys_claret]

A fee of short of £10 million for Hendrick doesn't suggest we had our pants pulled down at all.

Tony yet again you say one thing to back up your arguments but are going against what you have said in the past. in this article you state the Hendrick deal was believed to be in excess of 10 million

http://www.uptheclarets.com/burnley-sig ... s-hendrick" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[aggi]

The odd thing is aggi, that £46m of the £53m owed to the owners resulted from loans during their first season in the Premier League.

Suggesting perhaps that the funding was for recruitment in the PL prior to the TV money arriving, as opposed to finance to enable them to exit the Championship.

Nevertheless, contrary to suggestions higher up this thread, they are now a profitable business without any further financial intervention from Demin and co.

A large part switched from >1 year to <1 year (I think that's what you are probably referring to).

[KRBFC]

The odd thing is aggi, that £46m of the £53m owed to the owners resulted from loans during their first season in the Premier League.

Suggesting perhaps that the funding was for recruitment in the PL prior to the TV money arriving, as opposed to finance to enable them to exit the Championship.

Nevertheless, contrary to suggestions higher up this thread, they are now a profitable business without any further financial intervention from Demin and co.

Bump for CT to read