Arsenal 2019 Finances Predicted – Gunned Down

Arsenal 2019 Financial Predictions

Arsenal experienced their first Wenger-less year in the 2018/19 season, with Unai Emery taking the reigns following a steady decline in performance in recent years.

The early signs were promising, and it would’ve been a successful season had the club not succumbed to a 4-1 loss to London rivals Chelsea in the Europa League final and secured a Champions League place for the coming season.

A slight improvement in the Premier League was welcomed, however defeat at home to Crystal Palace and a draw with Brighton in the last few weeks of the season robbed Arsenal of a Top 4 finish which was very much available with London rivals Chelsea and Tottenham stumbling into the Champions League.

This article aims to predict how last season affected Arsenal and their finances and what the future holds.

Let’s delve into the numbers.

Revenue Prediction

Arsenal FC 2019 Revenue Prediction

Matchday Revenue

Arsenal’s matchday revenue was £99m in 2018, falling slightly from £100m in 2017 after a difficult season. Despite their Europa League run this season, Arsenal had the same number of competitive home games as in 2017/18 and therefore matchday revenue is unlikely to increase substantially. 

However, Arsenal should see a slight increase due to reaching the Europa League final, with the competition (and ticket prices) being considerably more lucrative than the League Cup (in which Arsenal reached the final and had many home games in 2018).

Premier League average attendances rose from 59,323 to 59,899 (1%) and therefore, we expect a slight increase of about 1% in matchday revenue to £100m.

Broadcasting Revenue

Broadcasting revenue was £180m in 2017/18 after a poor season with the only highlight being a League Cup final appearance. 

Premier League Payments

Despite finishing a position higher in the Premier League last season, Premier League prize money remained at £142m as despite distributions increasing, Arsenal featured on live TV three less games last season than in 2018.

Arsenal also fared far worse in the League Cup this year, only reaching the Quarter Finals compared to a final defeat in 2018. However, the prize money available in this competition is tiny and will have an immaterial impact on Arsenal’s finances.

Going a round further in the FA Cup will boost revenue by a few hundred thousand pounds for Arsenal which will more than negate the fall in revenue from the drop in League Cup performance.

Arsenal did manage to go a round further than last season in the Europa League, reaching the final in Baku and despite not achieving the result desired, will likely see a boost in revenue of around £4-6m from prize money of the competition which has become more lucrative in recent seasons.

With much of Arsenal’s other competition revenue remaining the same as in 2018, this should see Arsenal’s broadcasting revenue increase by around £5m to £185m.

Commercial Revenue

Commercial revenue saw a drop from £117m to £107m in 2017/18 in Wenger’s final season. We expect commercial revenue to bounce back in what seems to be a new drive at the Emirates to boost their relevance once more. The general popularity of the Premier League has seen all club’s commercial income rise and this should be no different for Arsenal.

A new Adidas deal will significantly boost revenue in 2020, however before that comes into effect, we expect a rise in revenue to around £115m to be reasonable.

Other Revenue

Arsenal also had a significant amount of other revenue of £17m, compromising of transfer loan income (£2m) and property sales (£15m).

Arsenal only have one more property in their portfolio after the sale of a property next to Holloway Road Station in 2018 and there is no evidence this has been sold or the what the value of this property is. With the loans of the likes of Asano, Nelson, Ospina and Chambers, it is likely Arsenal obtained £3-5m on these loans.

Therefore, we predict that Arsenal’s other revenue will only be £5m, UNLESS they sale their remaining property which could bring in a significant chunk of extra income.

Total Revenue

Overall, Arsenal’s revenue should be around £405m, a slight increase on 2018 (£403m) due mainly to potential rises in commercial revenue and their Europa League campaign. Revenue may increase by a larger extent if that final property held is sold. 

All-in-all, revenue is likely to remain fairly similar to last year due to competition performance improving only slightly with the club remaining trophy-less and Top 4-less.

Cost Predictions

Arsenal FC 2019 Costs Prediction

Amortisation

Amortisation is a large portion of total costs to a Premier League club and Arsenal incurred amortisation of £86m in 2018. The signings of Torreira, Leno, Sokratis and Guendouzi will add a fair bit to these costs while the departure of Perez will reduce this slightly. 

Based on the transfer fees and contract lengths of the new signings, we expect amortisation to rise by around £15m to £100m for Arsenal.

Exceptional Costs

As mentioned, Arsenal sold one of their two remaining properties in 2018 which brought the cost of that property into their expenses last year of £9m. With the sale of the one remaining property unknown, property costs have been excluded in our 2019 prediction.

The departure of Wenger and some of his staff and then the costs of bringing in Emery, Arsenal incurred exceptional costs of £17m at the end of last season. These costs are obviously not expected again and have been excluded.

Wages and Other Costs

Arsenal FC 2019 Wages Prediction

Other expenses such as stadium maintenance, lease costs etc. amounted to £88m in 2018. We expect these have increased to around £95m in 2019 based on recent trends.

Wages are the most difficult area of finances to predict due to the opaque nature and privacy of these amounts. Arsenal brought in Torreira, Leno, Sokratis, Guendouzi and Liechtensteiner as first team players in 2019 while high earners such as Cazorla and Mertesacker departed the Emirates.

Therefore, despite these arrivals we do not expect wages to increase significantly and as such we predict wages are likely to increase from £240m to around £245m.

Total costs

Overall costs are hence due to increase to around £450m subject to the effects of salary bonuses and property sales. Furthermore, contract renewals (which were few) may be more significant than first thought.

Lastly, should there be any exceptional costs (which in nature cannot be predicted) costs may increase to a larger extent.

Transfers Analysis

Arsenal FC 2019 Transfer Prediction

Arsenal brought in Torreira (£26m), Leno (£23m), Sokratis (£14m), Guendouzi (£7m) and Liechtensteiner (Free) as first team players in 2019 for a combined £72m.

Departing were Perez (£4m), Campbell (£1m) and Akpom (£1m) for a combined £6m.

This led Arsenal to a net transfer spend of £66m, much changed from the net transfer income of £3m in 2018.

However, in 2018, Arsenal saw a host of departures (£141m) which led to a massive profit on player sales of £115m due to the sales of the likes of the Ox, Walcott, Giroud, Szczesny etc.

With the lack of player sales in 2019, Arsenal will be lucky to record a profit on sales of £5m, a drop of more than £110m, which will see profitability take a huge hit.

Cash will also take a hit after spending in 2018/19, with the club already owing clubs a net £50m in transfers (Arsenal owe around £100m and are owed about £50m), plus the £72m spent this season, showing why Arsenal are so desperate to agree deals in instalments this season (Hi Zaha and Pepe).

Arsenal need not worry however with cash reserves of £231m in the bank.

Profit/Loss Prediction

Arsenal FC 2019 Profit Prediction

Arsenal made a pre-tax profit of £70m (post tax: £57m) in 2018 largely due to player sales that were not evident in 2019. As mentioned, player sales are likely to fall by around £110m and with revenue and costs predicted to remain at similar levels, a loss of between £30-40m is likely.

A return to the Champions League is hence vital to the club’s long-term finances. However, the new Adidas deal will see a significant bump in revenue which should help the club to return to profitability in 2020, subject to how they perform in the upcoming season and player sales.

I hope you enjoyed this article! Share with a Gunner and look out for when the actual finances are released to see how we fared!

Please follow and like us:

Liverpool – The Kop’s Commercial Weakness

Liverpool Commercial Revenue Compared

Liverpool FC released their financial results recently to great fanfare, record profits, growing revenue and a competitive wage structure were all reasons for Liverpool fans to get excited. Among all this excitement the composition of their revenue went under the radar.

Liverpool Revenue 2018

Roughly half of their revenue was from TV money and prize money, which although shows success in a season, isn’t something that can be relied upon each year. Unless your Real Madrid or Barcelona, Champions League finals/trophies are a rare occurrence due to the strength of the competing rivals.

Roughly a fifth of Liverpool’s revenue came from matchday earnings which has remained fairly stable but is increasing as the capacity of Anfield increases.

This leaves around a third of Liverpool’s revenue being from commercial revenue. Commercial revenue is made up of sponsorship deals and merchandise sales. This is the area where Liverpool are below Europe’s top table and an area that has significant room for improvement.

The Problem

Commercial Revenue 2018

The graph above shows the potential Liverpool have to grow this area of revenue and boost income significantly to boost their financial muscle. Liverpool’s commercial revenue is the 8th highest in Europe according to Deloitte and is less than half the amount Real Madrid command. Although no one is saying Liverpool are as big a club as Real Madrid, the difference is much bigger than it should be.

Liverpool lag their northern rivals in Manchester significantly too, by more than £100m in Manchester United’s case. This gap needs to shrink if Liverpool are serious about mixing with Europe’s finest.

Mr. Popular

Social Media Following Football 2018

The reason Liverpool have so much potential and are currently under achieving when it comes to commercial revenue is the growth the club has experienced in popularity and appeal worldwide under Klopp.

Liverpool have struggled over the past couple of decades to ‘get with the times’ and match their rivals in digital popularity as football moved into the modern era. Manchester United perfectly exploited and channelled the new commercial era and as a result saw their finances explode with Liverpool playing catch up ever since.

However, Liverpool are catching up and are ahead of many in terms of social media followers. The club have the 6th highest number of twitter followers of the twenty teams to make up the Deloitte Money League. They also have 9th highest number of followers on Instagram which could be improved upon with more engagement and is an area for growth.

The club only has the 10th highest number of Facebook ‘likes’ and should look at these platforms as areas that could grow significantly. In all these areas they aren’t far of moving further up the social media chain as the club engage to a greater extent with the fans and their success on the pitch attracts more digital fans.

The importance of this nowadays cannot be underestimated, a club’s social media pull gives companies a great way to advertise directly to their target market being football fans or geographical location. A greater number of followers makes it much easier to negotiate lucrative sponsorship deals, especially the smaller club partners who can make up a considerable amount of a club’s commercial revenue.

Kitted Out

Shirt Sponsorship Deals Football 2018

Liverpool currently earn roughly £28m from their kit manufacturer New Balance annually. This is almost a third of the amount Manchester United attract in their £75m deal with Adidas and 5 times less than Barcelona’s high of £140m from Nike.

Liverpool are (and should be) entertaining offers from the likes of Adidas and Nike as they look to match, if not exceed the amount earned by Manchester United when their deal with New Balance runs out at the end of next season.

Liverpool should be able to increase their kit deal significantly as Manchester United negotiated their deal a few years ago so by now, this should be well within the grasp of Liverpool considering the growth in popularity the club has sustained of late.

Their current deal is also below the likes of Chelsea and Manchester City, clubs of a similar stature social media wise however Liverpool also have a larger fan base outside of this and would therefore hope to command at least in excess of the £50m Manchester City recently negotiated with Puma.

Getting More Shirty

Kit Sponsorship Deals Football 2018

Liverpool have stayed loyal to their shirt sponsors historically, seemingly married to Carlsberg until they parted ways a few years ago and Standard Chartered took their place. Liverpool chose wisely and have recently renegotiated their deal on £40m a year for four years, up from £30m. This was a shrewd move and Liverpool are doing well in terms of their shirt sponsor and there is not much room to improve in this area.

The club should focus on maintaining a good working relationship with Standard Chartered and negotiate at the appropriate time to improve the terms, maybe by incentivising additional performance related bonuses that will reward the club on the back of successes on the pitch.

Opportunity Knocks

Liverpool have many additional areas that could enhance commercial revenue with some controversial and others just sensible.

Sleeves

Liverpool currently have a 5-year deal with Western Union as their sleeve sponsor, mainly in line with their rivals. Arsenal are currently leading the way with an £8m-a-year deal, something Liverpool should consider exceeding considerably when their current deal expires in 3 years, something for the future.

Training kits

Liverpool’s training kit is sponsored by BetVictor and their current deal expires at the end of the season, making it an opportunity to bring in a more lucrative deal. For comparison, Barcelona have reportedly the highest training kit deal (with Beko) at around £16m a year, which offers a sizeable boost in revenue should Liverpool get anyway near that figure, either by improved terms of a new sponsor.

Naming Rights

Stadium naming rights are a controversial topic in England among fans with many opposed to the idea of ruining club traditions all for the sake of a few quid. However, recent studies have shown it is no longer a few quid with valuations in excess of £10m being placed on Anfield and other famous stadiums. A boost of even £10m in commercial revenue would by over 5%.

Club Partners

Liverpool could attempt to go a different way and go for volume with sponsors. Club partners can add small multi-million-pound deals here and there however if this was scaled up, could run to the tens of millions. The main drawback here is the time it may take and the devaluing of their main sponsor who may not be best pleased to see all these deals that take the shine of their large deals.

Go Strange

What if Liverpool find the newest trend like the sleeve sponsor? This is an option for the creative. How about shorts sponsors? Press conference sponsors? These are all options and many more. The club could also develop a new medium to share their content that substantially boost their social media following and attracts more lucrative deals.

Thanks for reading – share with a Liverpool fan!

Please follow and like us:

Arsenal 2018 Financial Review – Wenger Out, Cash Still In

Arsenal Financial Review 2017:18

2018 was a year that finally brought change for Arsenal being their final season under legendary manager Arsene Wenger, who many feel out-stayed his welcome. His final season wasn’t how things were meant to end with a 6thplaced finish in the league and a trophy less cup campaign (other than the Community Shield).

This year also represented Arsenal’s first season without Champions League football since 1998 and it began to show in their finances. Arsenal did in fact make a huge profit of £56.6m, up 60% on last year, but the underlying finances tell a different story with the profit solely due to player sales and the sale of a property (bet you didn’t see that coming).

This article analyses Arsenal’s financial status in detail, now let’s delve into the numbers.

Arsenal Profit:Loss 2018

Revenue Analysis

Arsenal Revenue 2018


Arsenal saw revenue down from last year due mainly to the lack of Champions League football. Revenue was down from £427.1m to £406.4m (5%).

Matchday revenue fell from £100.0m to £98.9m (1%) as the pricing of tickets for Europa League games were lower than those for the Champions League, this combined with no FA Cup run meant that matchday takings took a slight hit, despite more home games.

Broadcasting revenue also fell, falling from £198.6m to £180.1m (9%) as Arsenal felt the lack of Champions League football despite reaching the semi-finals of the Europa League and only reaching the last 16 of the Champions League last time out. They also lost approximately £1.9m from falling one place in the Premier League.

Commercial revenue also took a hit which may be the most disappointing and unexpected. Commercial revenue fell from £117.2m to £106.9m (9%). Commercial income was down due to fans spending less on merchandise as they became angrier towards the end of Wenger’s era and the global brand of Arsenal fell as the club’s results continued to decline, leading to lower sponsorship opportunities.

‘Other’ revenue rose sharply, increasing from £8.1m to £17.3m (114%). Arsenal also operate a property business alongside football (for reasons I’m not sure of) and have done pretty well from it. Of the £17.3m, £15.0m relates to the sale of a property next to Holloway Road Station. The rest is related to ‘player trading’.

Looking forward, I would expect revenue to remain at a similar level to this year, possibly falling even due to the lack of property sales likely as the club has pretty much cleared its property portfolio. For revenue to rise a Europa League victory is necessary and a solid commercial campaign.

Arsenal Costs 2018

Cost Analysis

While Arsenal’s revenue is falling, its costs are rising, significantly hurting their profitability, now relying on player sales to return a profit. Costs rose from £372.0m to £445.3m (20%), a hefty increase.

A big part of this was a rise in amortisation, which increased from £77.1m to £91.8m (19%) as the club replaced some old timers such as Walcott (who no longer attracted amortisation due to being at the club for so long) with new, expensive blood. Normally a rise in amortisation indicates investment whereas in this case it’s just reinvestment of funds as the net spend was negative.

For the property sold mentioned earlier, Arsenal also had costs of £9.4m that were incurred on the property, leading to a net profit of £5.6m.

Arsenal Wages 2018

Wages were also on the rise, increasing from £199.4m to £240.1m (20%) as Arsenal abandoned their strict wage control to tie down Ozil to a bumper new contract and also to sign Aubameyang. 

Many will see this as a step in the right direction however the haphazard nature of their wages now may unsettle the squad and has clearly impacted their current ability to buy players with only loans seen as being financially viable at the moment.

Of the huge increase in wages, it is worth noting that £16.8m relates to ‘exceptional costs’ which likely relate to Wenger leaving the club and a nice package for him to take away.

The increase in wages works out as an extra £783k a week which is an astronomical figure considering Arsenal also had many outgoings.

Elsewhere, Arsenal directors ‘earned’ £4.3m, up 26% on last year’s £3.4m total despite a poor season.

Arsenal saw net finances charges fall… thanks to Brexit! Arsenal’s underlying interest was similar to last year however a £3.3m gain due to favourable FX movements meant that their interest charges fell from £14.7m to £8.8m (40%).

Arsenal’s profits meant they paid tax of £13.7m, an effective tax rate of 19.5, broadly in line with the corporation tax rate of 19%.

Going forward, costs are likely to stay at similar levels as wages are likely to rise slightly again however such a rise will be offset by the lack of exceptional costs so we may even see a slight fall in costs and wages.

Transfers Analysis

Arsenal Net Transfer Spend 2018

Transfers are usually a sensitive subject for Arsenal fans due to the lack of ambition showed in the transfer market and it was no different this year.

In came Aubameyang (£57.4m), Lacazette (£47.7m) and Mavropanos (£1.9m) for a combined £107m, while Mkhitaryan joined in a swap deal with Sanchez.

Out went Oxlade-Chamberlain (£34.2m), Walcott (£20.3m), Giroud (£15.3m), Coquelin (£12.6m), Szczesny (£11.0m), Paulista (£9.9m) and Gibbs (£6.8m) for a total of £110m.

This led to a net transfer surplus of £3.0m compared to a net spend of £87m last year, a £90m swing. This huge drop off in spending has meant that fans are once again disgruntled as the club show again, they lack ambition to push on despite losing their top 4 spot and falling behind their rivals.

The new signings did well with Aubameyang and Lacazette adding much needed firepower however the back line is severely in need of investment. 

Those leaving the club were not particularly missed however fans will be annoyed to have lost Szczesny, Coquelin and Paulista for fairly cheap given the state of the transfer market currently.

All these departures led to a profit on player sales of a remarkable £120m (£6.8m last year). This means that had the club not sold any players, a loss of £50.2m before tax would have occurred, before taking into account the property sale of an extra £5.6m in profit. These player sales are clearly masking a club whose finances are declining.

From these transfers Arsenal did pay net cash out of £28.6m as they have negotiated to receive transfer fees over a longer period, in contrast last year there was a net cash outlay of £102.5m.

Arsenal are also owed another £61.5m in transfers over next couple of years while they are owed £100.2m, meaning they are owed net £38.2m which further confuses on why they are so constrained in the transfer market currently. This will become even more confusing in the next section.

On top of this, Arsenal may also owe another £7.6m in contingent transfer fees should players meet certain clauses.

Debt Analysis

Arsenal Net Debt 2018

Arsenal incredibly saw cash levels increase this year which will perplex fans due to the insistence the club has no money to spend and only loans will currently do. Cash levels grew from £180.1m to £231.3m (28%) as the club decided not to spend any of the cash coming in from transfers and elsewhere and instead watching it sit pretty in the bank.

At best this is cautious, at worse it is negligent. Any business needs to reinvest its cash to expand and improve, Arsenal are not doing this and instead are letting the money go to waste by not using it to for any good purpose.

Even stranger is the fact that Arsenal have outstanding debt of £216.5m (down from £227.4m) which could at least be paid down to reduce interest charges if the club feel they don’t want to spend on transfers. All the debt is external debt and most likely could be paid down early to boost the club sustainability however the owners do not see it that way.

The above has led to Arsenal at least positively being in a net cash position of £14.8m compared to net debt of £47.4m. Arsenal’s owners seem wary to spend and this may be compounded by their worsening finances with the owners deciding to cautiously create a large buffer should their finances continue to worsen.

However, this feels to be a self-fulfilling prophecy and a lack of investment will see them perennially finish 6thif they don’t start investing or at least spending sensibly and smartly like their North London rivals.

Thanks for reading, share with an Arsenal fan!

Please follow and like us:

Premier League 2018 Review – Wages

Premier League 2018 Wages Review

As Premier League clubs grow richer, so do the players as we saw in our revenue analysis, revenue has increased dramatically and so have wages, rising 18.5% to surpass the £2.5bn barrier.

In this new Premier League world, we have wages of £150k a week as commonplace throughout the league, not just the top 6. Wages rose by over £7.5m per week and this includes the growing wage of directors and key management as their competence off the field grows in importance.

This article analyses the wages of players and directors among Premier League clubs competing in the 2016/17 season.

Who’s Up, Who’s Down?

Premier League 2017 Wage Growth

Wages increased on average by 28.6% as the majority of clubs saw sharp increases due to increased player investment.

The promoted clubs were key contributors here with Burnley (59.4%), Middlesbrough (100.3%) and Hull (104.3%) experiencing the highest growth rates as they looked to align their wages with their newly earned Premier League riches. Interestingly, only Burnley survived despite being considerably more cautious with their wages than the other two.

Chelsea (-1.2%) and Liverpool (-0.6%) were surprisingly the only clubs to experience a fall in wages, albeit very small drops. Chelsea’s sales of high earners Oscar, Cuardrado (Loan), Ivanovic and Mikel were the main reasons for this in a season of few high-profile purchases. Liverpool similarly saw the exit of Benteke, Skrtel, Balotelli and Sakho who were all on high wages as Jurgen Klopp began his rebuild.

Tottenham saw wages grow by 26.9% as they looked to reward their players performances with new, improved contracts such as Kane, Alli and Eriksen. The purchases of Sissoko, Janssen and Wanyama supported this growth with the only high-earner to depart being Chadli.

Manchester City financial growth saw no signs of slowing down as wages grew by 33.5% as the Guardiola era began with a summer transfer spree featuring minimal departures as surplus players entered the final year or two of their high paid contracts, we expect wage growth to fall as these players depart at the end of their contracts.

Rivals Manchester United experienced a smaller rise of only 13.5% despite the high-profile purchases of Pogba and Ibrahimović due to a number of departures and the relative size of their wage bill already.

Leicester rewarded their Premier League winning squad with substantial pay rises leading to wage growth of 40% as the likes of Vardy, Mahrez and Schmeichel signed new deals which was added to by new higher profile players.

On the low side alongside Chelsea and Liverpool were Sunderland (0.6%) and Stoke (3.2%), possibly signalling they were worried about their soon to be relegations and were preparing for as much.

Premier League 2017 Wage Growth per week

In absolute terms, the average wage rise was £375k per week, or £19.5m a year. Leading the way however was Manchester City’s astronomical rise of £1.3m a week in wages after their transfer spree to introduce Guardiola to the Premier League.

Crystal Palace saw wages rise £600k a week after the introduction of Sam Allardyce who used the winter transfer window to significantly strengthen the squad with a sizeable investment, a tactic that ultimately worked as they secured survival.

Middlesbrough also experienced a £600k a week increase but were unfortunately much less successful in doing so after suffering relegation and the unenviable wage reduction strategy required. Wages are likely to fall automatically as relegation wage clauses come into effect.

Tottenham significant contract renewals contributed to wages rising by £517k a week as Harry Kane and Co became richer after another top 4 finish for the club.

Manchester United saw wages rise by £600k a week despite a relatively small % increase due to the enormous size of their wage bill to begin with.

As mentioned, on the other end of the scale is Chelsea and Liverpool who saw minimal wage drops per week of £50k and £15k, remaining relatively stable in terms of wages after offloading deadwood.

Arsenal also remained relatively stable with wages growing by £77k a week, a minimal 2% increase for the club.

Wage to Revenue Ratio

Premier League 2017 Wage Turnover ratio

A key performance indicator for all clubs, the wage: revenue ratio is key to a club in measuring financially stability and prudence. A high ratio suggests overspending, making profitability almost impossible whilst a ratio too low suggest over cautiousness and a failure maximise the use of resources. The average is 57% and most clubs will be aiming for a ratio of 50-55%.

The ratio shows a clear trade-off between risk and reward with clubs having to balance the need to grow and meet their targets and their financial future. Clubs near the bottom of the Premier League are likely to have higher ratios due to their lower revenues, however these clubs still spend an awful lot on wages due to the riches of staying in the Premier League.

Those higher up the table pay higher wages but see relatively higher revenue – which is what those spending large near the bottom are aspiring to.

Crystal Palace have the highest rate at 78.5% after their huge spending in the winter transfer window to preserve their Premier League status, a gamble that paid off but also potentially jeopardised their future, however such a gamble has enriched those at the club including senior management (more on this later).

Swansea’s was nearly as high at 77.3% due to low revenue and relatively high wages, a situation we hope they have remedied in 2018 after relegation which will cause this key ratio to increase.

Tottenham much discussed wage policy sees them achieve the lowest ratio at 41.4% as Daniel Levy continues to run a tight ship, something he is proud of considering their recent domestic performances, an increase in revenue will however help them increase their wages more in line with their rivals.

North London rivals Arsenal are 3rdon the list at 47.6%, another club who are notoriously known under Wenger to watch the purse strings, it must be something in the water up in North London!

Manchester United despite have one of the largest wage bills in world football have a wage to revenue ratio of only 45.3% due to the huge revenue they generate, showcasing that potentially player investment and huge wages leads to larger revenue, a model that Manchester City seem to have adopted in their earlier years.

Chelsea at 60.8% have the highest ratio due to providing players with historically high wages whilst also stockpiling young talent meaning they have more player wages on their books.

Liverpool (57%) and Manchester City (55.8%) complete the top 6 who all have lower than 61% ratios which is around the ball park most clubs should be.

Other than Chelsea, Crystal Palace and Swansea, the only other clubs with ratios above 60% are Everton (61.1%), Southampton (61.2%), Stoke (62.5%), Sunderland (66.8%) and Watford (60.3%), all clubs with aspirations of growing despite Sunderland and Stoke’s recent troubles.

Of the rest, Burnley’s low ratio (50.5%) should be commended due to their performances in 2017 and 2018. Outside of those already mentioned Bournemouth (52.4%), Hull (52.4%), Middlesbrough (53.5%) and West Ham (51.8%) all have ratios below 55%.

Rich Directors

Premier League 2017 Director Wages

Directors and key management staff are becoming increasingly vital to the success of football clubs with their business acumen key in driving revenue from off the field sources. The work of many executives has been praised in both the transfer market and in raising the profile of their club. A good executive can propel a financially ruined club into a viable business and footballing success.

This is apparent in the fact that directors’ salaries rose 19% to £41.5m despite not playing a minute of football, with the average salary being just under £4m, working out an average of £72k a week which is a respectable Premier League footballer wage.

However, note that director salary disclosures in the accounts may not show the full picture with some directors paid in other opaque companies and through other means which are hidden and difficult to locate so the numbers here are likely to be understated to some degree.

The highest director compensation paid was by Manchester United unsurprisingly considering their global profile and stock listing. Manchester United directors were paid £12.5m last year with this including stock options that may be more valuable than recorded currently.

Tottenham are the next closet some way behind with payments of £9m with Daniel Levy paying himself £6m as a golden pat on the back for the recent successes of the club that few would argue with despite his insistence of being more prudent than that on his players.

Arsenal also pay highly with directors being paid £3.4m despite performing poorly as of late.

Liverpool’s directors were paid relatively poorly compared to their above rivals, receiving a meagre £1.6m.

Chelsea and Manchester City had minimal values in their accounts. This may have to do with Chelsea having no CEO for the majority of the year and until the appointment of Guy Laurence. The payments for other key management were likely to not have been disclosed and as such no analysis can be performed. There is a similar story for Burnley as well.

The lowest outside of this appears to be Hull with payments of only £185k made to directors.

Also, below £1m were Leicester (£325k), Stoke (£806k), Swansea (£634k) and Watford (£571k). The most surprising club here is Leicester due to the absence of any significant rise in director payments despite the incredible season they recently had.

Crystal Palace have a notably high compensation package for directors with wages paid to directors of £2.4m, with Steve Parrish paying himself all of that as the club’s only director after the club steered clear of relegation last year, a controversial decision by the Mr. Parrish.

Wages Summary

Premier League 2017 Wages

There was £2.5bn in wages last year, an eye-watering £48.1m a week with Premier League clubs incurring an average wage bill of £125m. The Premier League Top 6 account for a huge 51% of total wages, showing their unparalleled financial power.

There was a change at the top of the wage bill chart as Manchester City’s continuing financial growth saw them shell out £264.1m in Guardiola’s first season, overtaking Manchester United who paid out £263.5m in wages.

Chelsea (£219.7m), Liverpool (£207.5m) and Arsenal (£199.4m) follow at around the £200m mark as they continue to pay players top dollar to maintain their power and clutch of world class players.

The ever-rising Tottenham lag their rivals yet again in this department, paying out ‘only’ £126.9m on wages due to Levy’s tight wage policy, a strategy that may see them struggle to keep competing with their rivals.

Burnley must be commended for their comfortable survival despite operating the lowest wage bill in the Premier League of £61.2m.

Bournemouth (£64.9m) and Hull (£61.3m) were the only other clubs with wages under £70m.

On the other end of the scale, Leicester (£112.6m), Everton (£104.7m), Crystal Palace (£111.8m) and Southampton (£112.4m) were the only clubs outside the top 6 with wages exceeding £100m.

With this all said, wages are likely to continue increasing as the amount of revenue continues to rise in the Premier League and player wage demands continue to rise and the price of relegation becomes costlier. Wages are likely to increase to around £3bn in the coming year.

Thanks for reading, share with a friend!

 

 

 

 

 

Please follow and like us:

The True Costs of Transfers

Premier League True Summer Transfer Cost

The True Costs of the Premier League 2018 Summer Transfer Window

The Premier League transfer window has officially shut with over £1.2bn spent by Premier League clubs ahead of the new season.

Clubs have to be wary of Financial Fair Play when purchasing players to avoid penalties and bans (for more on this click here) and also need to ensure they are running sustainably for their owners etc.

This brings us to this article, which will explain the true costs of transfers from the 2018 summer transfer window explained briefly below:

When clubs sign a player, from an accounting perspective this is not all charged in the year of the transfer as the payments are matched to how the player will be used. So, a player signing for £50m on a 5-year contract is deemed to cost the club £10m a year, known as the amortisation cost. This is the true costs of the transfer per season for the club.

Another key element is player sales. In this regard the profit the club gain is not simply the transfer fee received minus the transfer fee paid, it is the transfer fee received less the remaining value of the player sold. So, for a £50m player on a 5-year contract, he will be ‘worth’ £50m minus the amortisation charges to date, so after two years of charges, the player will be ‘worth’ £30m. Hence, should a player be sold 2 years later for £50m, a ‘profit’ of £20m will be recorded, rather than nothing like many people believe.

This article will analyse each Premier League club’s business and compare to their counterparts.

Due to the availability of data, this excludes the costs of loans and player wages. All transfer fees and contract lengths are via Transfmartk.co.uk. In order to simplify the amortisation costs, we have ignored contract renewals which make the calculation more complex without much added insight.

Let’s Not Talk About Spend, Let’s Talk About Net Spend

Premier League Transfer Net Spend

Premier League clubs had an active transfer window despite its shortening, spending over £1.2bn, receiving only £353m in return, leaving the club with an astronomical net spend of £909m.

This was due to higher spending by certain clubs, with Liverpool leading the way by a distant after investing heavily following their Champions League heartache with Naby Keita, Fabinho, Alisson and Shaqiri joining while only Danny Ward left, leaving the merseysiders with a net spend of £151m.

Fulham became the first promoted club to ever break the £100m barrier after a barnstorming transfer window with 7 players arriving for transfer fees and only 1 leaving. This led to the club having a net transfer spend of £101m with Seri the pick of the players signed.

Fellow West Londoners Chelsea had the third biggest net spend at £92m after breaking the world transfer record for a goalkeeper in the £72m paid for Kepa after losing Courtois to Real Madrid and they also signed Jorginho.

Manchester United and Manchester City had quiet windows with both making one big purchase a piece with Fred joining United (along with Dalot and Grant) and Mahrez joining City.

At the other end of the scale were Watford with a net transfer spend of minus £23m after not reinvesting all of their Richarlison windfall. Newcastle also were in the black after recording a net transfer spend of minus £13m as Mike Ashley used transfer cash received to purchase House of Fraser rather than reinvest in the Toon.

Additional Amortisation Costs

Premier League Amortisation Costs

Premier League clubs face additional transfer costs of £275m this year alone after a huge transfer spend of over £1.2bn, with this cost spread of the players signed contracts which average at just over 4-year contracts.

Amortisation costs are, as explained above, based on transfer spend and contract lengths and as such the costs are higher for larger spends and also higher when contract lengths are shorter. A key example is Kepa, a £72m keeper who signed a 7-year contract, costing Chelsea just over £10m a year. While Mahrez, a £61m purchase on a 5-year contract cost Manchester City more at just over £12m a year despite the smaller transfer fee.

Liverpool unsurprisingly lead the way after their impressive transfer window where they spent £164m with Alisson signing a 6-year contract while Keita, Fabinho and Shaqiri signed 5-year deals. Liverpool will have additional costs of £31m after these deals.

Fulham had the second highest net spend after their £105m 7 player splurge with contracts lengths 4 years on average, bringing amortisation costs of £24m over that period.

Leicester despite their relatively small net spend have a large transfer costs due to their £103m spend with the Mahrez deal diluting their net spend after the club reinvested the Mahrez cash and then some, leading to an amortisation cost of £22m.

Chelsea and West Ham also had large amortisation costs above £20m after their productive transfer windows.

Tottenham were at the other end of scale after an inactive transfer window, becoming the first club since the transfer window came into effect in 2003 not to purchase or sell a player.

Crystal Palace were the only other club to have an additional amortisation cost below £5m.

Amortisation Costs Savings

Premier League Amortisation Savings

Premier League clubs saved £41m on amortisation cost after after player sales of £353m with many players sold either brought cheaply or have been long serving players that no longer attract amortisation costs after staying longer than their original contract.

Amortisation costs savings are driven again by the transfer fee paid when the player was brought and their original contract length. So, for instance Daley Blind signed for Manchester United 4 years ago for £15.8m on a 4-year contract, costing Manchester United just under £4m a year for those 4 years. Now that the 4 years are up, Blind costs United nothing from an accounting perspective, so no amortisation costs are saved and hence no savings included in our calculations.

As such many Premier League clubs didn’t recorded any savings as the players sold had already seen their entire transfer fee amortised. This includes players signed as youths such as Danny Ward at Liverpool or long serving players such as Courtois at Chelsea.

In a couple of situations, players were signed and immediately sold. This was the case for Benik Afobe at Wolves and Mikel Merino for Newcastle. In both these cases the amortisation costs were excluded when calculating additional costs and savings.

Bournemouth were the biggest savers, saving just under £8m after the sales of the after mentioned Benik Afobe to Wolves (before Wolves later sold him to Stoke), Lewis Grabban and Max Gradel.

Everton (£7m), Newcastle (£6m) and Watford (£5.5m) were the only other clubs to save in excess of £5m on player sales after the sales of the likes of Klassen, Mitrovic and Richarlison.

Burnley, Cardiff, Crystal Palace and Tottenham sold no players hence the reason for their lack of amortisation costs savings.

Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester United, Southampton and West Ham also had no amortisation costs savings despite player sales due to the players sold having been at the club for at least their original contract lengths such as Courtois, Danny Ward, Blind, Tadic and Kouyate.

Profit, Profit, Profit (Or Loss)

Premier League Transfer Profit

Premier League clubs due to this made profits on their sales of £247m after selling players for £353m, a 70% return on investment.

When players are sold, as seen above, this may not lead to amortisation costs savings if the players amortisation costs were low due to the price paid or they have been at the club a long time.

This doesn’t mean they receive nothing, as the amount earned is recorded as a profit on player sales. This is recorded as the transfer fee received minus their remaining value as explained in the introduction. However, to avoid you having to scroll up, here is an example from this season using Courtois.

Courtois cost Chelsea £8m 7 years ago on a 5-year contract, costing the club £1.6m a year initially. Each year he is worth less of his transfer fee, so after 1 year he is worth £6.4m and after 2 years £4.8m etc. After 5 years he is worth essentially zero, at this point when he is sold the transfer fee received is all profit, so Chelsea record a profit of £31.5m.

Clearly the biggest benefiters here were Leicester after their sale of Mahrez was essentially all profit and hence the club recorded a profit of £67.1m.

Chelsea also benefited as described above, whilst Watford were the only other club to record a profit of more than £30m after their sale of Richarlison.

Everton were one of only two clubs to make a loss after the costly purchases of Klassen and Funes Mori who they both made a loss on after buying them recently and then selling on the cheap. Leading to a loss of £3.8m.

Arsenal also made a loss on the flop transfer of Lucas Perez, diluted slightly by the sale of academy graduate Akpom.

Burnley, Cardiff, Crystal Palace and Tottenham made no transfer sales and hence recorded no profit or loss this year.

The Summary – The True Cost

Premier League True Transfer Cost

To work out the true cost of this transfer window we use the following formula:

Additional amortisation costs – Amortisation costs saved -/+ Profit/Loss on player sales.

This gives an interesting picture for Premier League clubs with a net transfer costs of minus £13.9m! Meaning Premier League clubs as a whole have saved on transfers this year from a Financial Fair Play perspective.

This is heavily skewed due to the net savings made by Leicester, Watford and Newcastle in particular.

Leicester, due to the Mahrez deal have made a saving of approximately £50m after their new signings, while Watford and Newcastle have also saved in excess of £20m.

Both Manchester clubs are in the black after making one big purchase each and selling a couple fringe players.

Chelsea are also in the black after selling Courtois.

Fulham have the highest cost of £20m after their sensation transfer window in which they spent hugely for a Premier League newcomer, making a statement on their ambitions.

Liverpool were unsurprisingly up there with a net cost of £18m. Everton and Arsenal were the only other clubs with a net cost exceeding £15m.

To put this all into perspective there is a mismatch. The profits received are all given in the period of sale, while new transfers are spread over their contract. This means that Chelsea, despite making a profit on Courtois, and hence their net costs are negative, will indeed see amortisation costs rise in the long run as next year they will not have that Courtois profit.

The same is the case for amortisation costs saved, for some of the players sold, they may only have had one more year of amortisation costs and as such this saving will not be there next year and hence they will see amortisation costs rise the following year.

Amortisation costs have risen over the years and will continue to as long as clubs net spends are still as large as they are.

I hope you found this article insightful, share with a friend!

Please follow and like us:

Premier League Financial Review – Summary

Premier League Financial Review 2018

Here is your summary of Premier League financial performance for all Premier League clubs in 2018. As financial accounts are released one year in arrears, finances are based on 2017 season performance. In depth summaries of these finances are available by clicking the club’s name or the infographic.

Arsenal – Wenger’s Wonga

Arsenal Financial Review 2018

Bournemouth – Finances With a Cherry on Top

Bournemouth Financial Review 2018

Burnley – Marking Their Turf 

Burnley Financial Review 2018

Chelsea – Riches of Champions

Chelsea Financial Review 2018

Crystal Palace – The Price Of Survival

Crystal Palace Financial Review 2018

Everton – Stuck Toffees 

Everton Financial Review 2018

Hull – Tigers Timid Roar

Hull City Financial Review 2018

Leicester – Foxes’ Fortunes

Leicester Financial Review 2018

Liverpool – Top 4, Top Finances

Liverpool FC Financial Review 2017

Manchester City – Sky’s The Limit

Manchester City Financial Review 2018

Manchester United – No Top 4, No Problem

Manchester United Financial Review 2018

Middlesbrough – Down The River

Middlesbrough Financial Review 2018

Southampton – Saints Keep Marching On

Southampton Financial Review 2018

Stoke – Cold, Wet and Windy But Safe

Stoke Financial Review 2018

Sunderland – Out of Lives

Swansea – Survival Swans

Swansea Financial Review 2018

Tottenham – White Cash Lane

Watford – Honest Hornets

Watford Financial Review 2018

West Brom –  Unusual Addicks

West Brom Financial Review 2018

West Ham – Ambitious Hammers

West Ham Financial Review 2018

Please follow and like us:

Arsenal Financial Review 2018

Arsenal Financial Review 2018

Arsenal had a difficult season in the Premier League, finishing outside the top 4 for the first time since 1996 – missing out on Champions League football in the process. Arsenal also had another poor Champions League, crashing out in familiar fashion at the last 16 stage to Bayern Munich.

As far as consolation prizes go, the FA Cup is a good one winning this trophy appeased fan unrest after a 2-1 victory over Chelsea at Wembley secured a 3rd FA Cup in 4 years – setting a new record of 13 FA Cup wins in the process.

Financially Arsenal once again improved, recording their highest profit figure in the last 6 years. Profits rose exponentially from £1.6m to £35.3m after increasing revenues outpaced rising expenses.

Lets delve into the numbers.

Arsenal Profit:Loss

Revenue Analysis

Arsenal Revenue

Arsenal passed the £400m revenue barrier for the first time with revenue rising from £353.5m to £424.0m (19.9%), continuing their year on year growth record.

Commercial revenue rose from £106.9m to £117.3m (9.7%) after a successful commercial campaign yielded new and extended secondary partnerships with BNN Technology, MTN, Universal Pictures, Gatorade among others.

Matchday revenue stayed relatively stable, edging to £100.0m from £99.9m with the club near enough maxing out their stadium capacity for all home games, indicating an expansion may be necessary for the Emirates in order to increase matchday revenue.

Broadcasting revenue was the main reason for Arsenal’s 20% rise in overall revenue, increasing from £140.6m to £198.6m (41.3%) after the new Premier League TV deal came into effect as well as a boost in Champions League and FA Cup prize money.

Other income rose from £6.1m to £8.1m (32.8%) with the majority relating to Arsenal’s property business.

Arsenal are unfortunately likely to see revenue fall next year with the absence of Champions League football, the only hope of offsetting this lost revenue being a Europa League triumph which will be difficult after drawing Atletico Madrid in the Semi-Final. Manchester United received £48.5m after winning the Europa League, however this was helped by the club being in the Champions League group stage in the first place, dropping to the Europa League after a third place group finish.

The club also failed to have any significant domestic cup runs this season and as such matchday and broadcasting revenues will suffer from less games in these competitions while a 6th or 7th placed finish will reduce their Premier League merit payments.

Expense Analysis 

Arsenal Operating expenses

Expenses rose less significantly than revenue, increasing from £340.4m to £372.0m after the club managed to control its costs well despite player investment.

Amortisation costs rose from £59.2m to £77.1m (30.2%) after significant player investment, showcasing the club’s commitment to better support Arsene Wenger in the transfer market after years of being frugal, this being the third consecutive year of amortisation growth.

Net finance costs rose from £13.4m to £14.7m (9.7%) despite a fall in debt levels after adverse movement on the financial instruments they owe money on.

Depreciation on Arsenal’s fixed assets such as their stadium and training ground rose from £14.3m to £15.0m (4.9%) after the club invested significant funds into improving these.

Arsenal Wages

Wages stayed relatively stable despite player investment, rising from £195.4m to £199.4m (2%) after failure to secure Champions League qualification led to smaller bonuses being payable to players, as it should be. This offset the rise in wages from the arrival of their new players while they also saw a few high earners depart on loan or on free transfers.

This small increase in wages does still equate to an extra £77k extra a week spend on players.

Arsenal had a hefty tax bill of £9.3m compared to only £1.2m last year, a new effective tax rate of 20.9% due to previous accounting/tax technicalities.

Transfers Analysis

Arsenal Net Transfer Spend

Arsenal saw 5 players join the club with only 3 leaving after an expensive summer.

In came Xhaka (£40.5m), Mustafi (£36.9m), Perez (£12.6m), Asano (£3.6m) and Holding (£2.7m) for a combined £96.3m.

Out went Gnabry (£4.5m), Silva (£2.7m) while Wilshere left on loan for a fee of £2.1m, bringing in a total of £9.3m back into the club.

This led to a huge increase in Arsenal’s net spend, rising from £21.6m to £87.0m (303%).

Despite this, the signings can only be seen as poor after they failed to qualify for the Champions League or look like a threat in the Premier League. Mustafi, Xhaka and Perez failed to live up to their price tags with the latter already departing the club.

Arsenal did however see a huge increase in their profit on player disposals with Gnabry and Silva increasing this from £2.0m to £6.8m (240%) with both being brought for peanuts years ago as youth players. This still doesn’t amount to a huge amount of income to Arsenal however.

The club spent cash of £111.5m on player transfers compared to £66.8m last year, showcasing the enhanced commitment to try and compete financially in the transfer market.

Arsenal only received £8.9m in cash for transfers compared to the £12.6m received last year with few departures.

The club also potentially owe another £20.5m in transfers should certain clauses on ex players be met.

Asset/Liability Analysis

Arsenal Net Debt

Arsenal saw net debt levels rise after player investment and stadium improvement costs saw cash levels drop.

Cash levels fell from £226.5m to £180.1m (25.8%) after a net transfer cash spend of £102.5m and a stadium/facility improvement cash spend of £25.3m. The club also paid interest of £12.3m and repaid £8.1m of debt.

Debt levels fell ever so slightly after the debt repayment, falling from £232.6m to £227.4m (2.2%).

This led to Arsenal’s net debt levels increasing 7 fold from £6.1m to £47.3m (675%) after being close to net cash position for the last two years. 

This suggests a slight change in strategy by Arsenal as they look to bridge the ever increasing financial gap as well as the gap in quality emerging on the pitch. Fans will suggest this move comes a little too late after their Champions League qualification failures however they will be hoping similar investment continues and increases over the next couple of seasons.

Thanks for reading, share with an Arsenal fan!

Please follow and like us:

Arsenal Half-Year Financial Review 2017

Arsenal 2017 Results

Season Review

Arsenal had another mixed year, on and off the pitch. Arsenal finished the season on a high, winning the FA Cup once again against London rivals Chelsea however it will be what happened before that will stick in the minds of the Arsenal fans. Another poor Champions League campaign ended in a last 16 exit, which they won’t be able to achieve this season after missing out on Champions League football for the first time in 21 years whilst also finishing below North London rivals Tottenham for the first time since 1995.

Off the pitch performance was also disappointing for the 6 months to November 2017 with footballing profits for down from £54.2m to a measly £15.6m (71.2%) due to a combination of falling revenue and rising costs.

An overall profit was realised only because of a £58.4m profit on player disposals compared to the previous year where a profit of just £6.3m was realised, further information to anger the Arsenal fans.

This article will analyse the different aspects of their financial performance.

Arsenal Half Year Profit

Revenue Analysis

Arsenal Half Year Revenue

Arsenal’s revenue fell a fair bit this year with all areas of footballing revenue down from last year, however revenue from their property business was up, with one of the two remaining properties sold.

The main cause for the decline was a huge 19.5% fall in broadcasting revenue, decreasing from £85.3m to £68.7m due to lower broadcasting distribution from UEFA for their current Europa League campaign, with the impact not greater due to a weekend EURO offsetting the impact and also having 2 more televised games in the this period. Another season of no Champions League football is expected which will may lead to their level of broadcasting revenue being the new normal.

Commercial revenue fell to £55.7m to £57.9m (3.8%), with fans spending less on their club  merchandise and a lower amount of sponsorship activity leading to this small fall in revenue.

Matchday revenue was down despite what was a successful pre season tour with revenue down from £45.8m to £42.6m (7%), due to one less Europa League home game in the period and the lower pricing for Europa League games than the Champions League, with the lack of Champions League the main reason for their revenue declines.

Also included in revenue was a £746k relating to player trading which normally isn’t part of revenue.

Expense Analysis

Arsenal Half Year Expenses

Football operating expenses rose £16.3m to £151.4m (12.1%), this is before taking into account property costs which we largely ignore in this article. The rise is mostly due to a £13.2m rise in wages despite the departures of high earning first-teamers with the signing of Lacazette undoubtedly contributing to this huge rise as they look to put in place a more competitive wage structure to compete with their rivals. This amount will rise further with the new record breaking contract for Ozil.

The costs didn’t rise any higher thanks to a fall in finance costs of £3.3m as the interest rate on their stadium repayments fell and also a higher market value to their financial bonds.

Player amortisation costs rose to £43.6m from £36.0m (21.1%) due to high transfer fees relating to the Lacazette signing and the low amortisation costs of their outgoings who were wither signed a while ago (Oxlade-Chamberlain, Szczesny and Gibbs) or were signed for a low fee (Gabriel) – For more information on player amortisation costs click here.

Transfer Analysis

Arsenal Half Year Net Spend

Arsenal had a poor transfer window, bringing in Lacazette for a then club-record fee and free agent Kolasinac but not kicking on from there, losing Oxlade-Chamberlain to rivals Liverpool and also selling Wojciech Szczesny on the cheap. They did however manage to sell Gabriel and Gibbs who were deemed no longer good enough to feature for reasonable fees.

Arsenal brought in only Lacazette and Kolasinac at a cost of £47.7m with none of the players making a significant contribution this season, despite promising starts for the two, with Lacazette still being Arsenal’s top scorer.

Arsenal sold Oxlade-Chamberlain (£34.2m), Szczesny (£11m), Gabriel Paulista (£9.9m) and Gibbs (£6.8m), with Debuchy and Sanogo leaving on free transfers, bring in £61.9m to the Arsenal coffers.

This hence led to a net spend of negative £14.1m despite large cash reserves and a promise to be more ambitious ever since they moved into and paid off their new stadium.

Assets & Liability Analysis

Arsenal Half Year Net Debt

Arsenal’s debt level rose £8.8m to £56.2m (15.7%) adverse bond movements, however cash levels are still strong with £160.6m in cash available, some of the will be used to increase the Emirates Stadium capacity by 780 seats to just over 60,600 as they look to satisfy demand.

With tickets prices averaging at about £70 a game from 19 premier league games this could bring in over £1m a season before taking into account cup games.

Cash levels fell by £19.4m due to a larger tax bill, debt repayments and net transfers fees. Arsenal fans will be hoping to use a larger part of this cash to invest into their troubled team… and maybe even a new manager.

Thanks for reading – Share with your fellow Arsenal Fans!

Please follow and like us:

You’ve Been Sponsored

You've been sponsored

Sponsorship revenue is a major source of income for premier league clubs and has been increasing year on year. Commercially vital to clubs, major sponsorships provide revenue of a long period due to the contracts usually being over a few years. This year club sponsorships brought in £282 million in revenue for premier league clubs before taking into the various partnerships they also delve into. This article will will go into detail about the types of industries that are attracted to invest and sponsor football clubs. We will also look at kit manufacturers and the role they play in football finance.

Football sponsorship has changed immensely over the years. Looking at the last 11 years (2007 – 2017), Beer has diminished as a large purchaser of sponsorships with no current club having a beer manufacturer as a sponsor. Betting companies have dominated as of late with a high of 9 companies donning sponsorship deals in 2016/17 season, nearly half of all clubs. This makes perfect sense being that football fans represent a key audience for betting companies. Interestingly, this space is not dominated by the largest, most well-known betting companies (other than Bet365 and BetWay), rather overseas and casino gambling companies being the most keen sponsors. It would be interesting to see if the likes of Paddy Power and Ladbrokes decide to enter this space in the future.

Premier League Sponsorship Companies

Financial services companies are aiming to fill the gap left since Barclays no longer sponsor the Premier League. Banks, Insurance and pay-day loans companies are all present here and the financial sector has been ever present in the sponsoring premier league clubs, with at least 3 on average in each of age last 11 years.

Airlines are another major part of the football clubs with two of the largest clubs, Arsenal and Manchester City representing the industry. Both have long standing partnerships with their respective airline.

Other industries to have sponsored Premier League clubs over the years include Sports fashion, Charities, Automobiles and confusingly a Zoo!

Premier League Shirt Sponsorship

As mentioned, sponsorships are a huge source of cash for the clubs with over £282m coming from shirt sponsors alone. Above we have the league table of shirt sponsors. It has a very familiar look to it, with domination from the top 6 who take home over 75% of sponsorship revenue. Man United show their dominance as the most reputable club in English football if not the world, with their Chevrolet deal bring them a handsome £47m a year. While newly promoted Huddersfield and Brighton at the foot of the table with deals of £1.5m each, more than 30 times less than Manchester United.

West Ham can be pleased at being 7th with their BetWay sponsorship bring in £10m a year, this is due to run until the end of this season and they will be hoping a strong showing in the league this season can lead to a similar, if not larger deal especially with the attraction of such of large stadium and tourist attraction for prospective sponsors.

Leicester have a long term agreement with shirt and stadium sponsor King Power and have yet to really cash in their title heroics through this commercial medium.

Interestingly, all London clubs are in the top half of the table, suggesting their is a preference among sponsors to pay a premium to sponsor London clubs, with Crystal Palace above the likes of Newcastle, Leicester, West Brom and Southampton.

Please Stay!

In terms of turnover of club sponsorships, only Tottenham of the Premier League ever-presents has had more than 2 sponsorships, with 6 in the 11 years analysed. Only Arsenal however have not changed sponsors during this  period, however most of these changes were after a long period with that sponsor and we suspect their current deals to continue for the foreseeable future. West Brom have a record high of 7 sponsors in 9 years (including 1 year with none), this is interesting as to whether this indicates poor commercial success or just a policy of renewal. This doesn’t seem to be working with their current deal the 4th worst in the league ahead of only newly-promoted Brighton and Huddersfield, and Burnley.

Kitted Out

Premier League Kit Deals

Kit manufacturer income is another major source of sponsorship income, many large sport brands pay millions to create kits for clubs, profiting from the sales of these. The largest two manufactures are the most well known sports brand in the world, Adidas and Nike. Adidas have seen a huge decline however since their high of 9 kits in 2013 to only 3 in 2017, even losing Chelsea who cut their sponsorship short to sign for Nike last season, paying £67m in the process. The spread of sport companies has diversified in recent years with none dominating as was the case with Adidas, Nike and Umbro in previous years. Umbro were previously a huge producer of kits, making 6 kits in 2007, the largest at that time to none in 2013 before renewing their presence recently with 3 currently rocking the diamond on their kits.

It will be interesting to see how Adidas react to their recent fall, they may decide to attract a large club such as Arsenal to their ranks after missing out on Manchester City who have agreed a deal with Puma for next season.

Speaking of Puma, they lead the way this year for clubs wearing their brand, which has been on a steady increasing trend since 2007.

Premier League Kit Deal Income

There is the usual pattern for Kit makers as there is in performance in domestic leagues, the top 6 dominate due to their domestic success and the large fan bases that come with that. The top 6 take home a remarkable 89% of income generated from kit manufacturers.

Surprisingly, Manchester City lag their domestic rivals significantly in the value of their deal with Nike, coming in at only £12m a year compared to the £75m Adidas deal of their Manchester rival or £60m a year deal of Chelsea who also have their kits made by Nike, something that will be rectified once Puma take over in the summer in a £50m a year deal.

Data was unavailable for Huddersfield and Brighton, however we suspect their deals to be around the £1m mark, maybe lower than Bournemouth who are bottom with an £800k annual deal.

Sleeves of Gold

A new phenomenon among premier league clubs is the introduction of sleeve sponsorships, with 17 out of the 20 premier league teams (Arsenal, Manchester United and Tottenham are yet to have one). This has brought in on average £3m a year extra revenue to premier league clubs, for example Liverpool Western Union deal has brought in £5m a year to the clubs coffers. Chelsea have the largest sleeve sponsor deal to date, with an extra £8m year brought in, while at the other end of the scale Huddersfield only bring in £300k in extra revenue from their sleeves.

Premier League Sleeve Sponsors

I hope you enjoyed this article, please share and like us on Facebook and Twitter.

Please follow and like us:

Matchday Money – Gameweek 20

Matchday Money Gameweek 20

Welcome to the first in a new series where we estimate the matchday gate receipts taken at all premier league games each week. We will compare the revenue generated between teams and compare their strategy for maximising matchday revenue.

The revenue is calculated based on an average of the highest and lowest prices offered to club members for each match. This amount is then multiplied by the number of tickets available for sale which for home teams is attendance less away ticket allocation and season tickets sold. Away teams is simply the away ticket allocation multiplied by the away ticket price. A separate article will analyse the season ticket revenue taken by each club.

The away allocation differs from game to game with it up to negotiation between the clubs. The lower of 10% of stadium capacity or 3,000 seats must be offered to away teams on each matchday, however this is not always taken up as clubs analyse the demand for the game among their fans and choose accordingly.

Here are the matchday results for gameweek 20:

Bournemouth 3 – 3 West Ham

Chelsea 2 – 0 Brighton

Crystal Palace 2 – 3 Arsenal

Huddersfield 1 – 1 Stoke

Liverpool 5 – 0 Swansea

Manchester United 2 – 2 Burnley

Newcastle 0 – 1 Manchester City

Tottenham 5 – 2 Southampton

Watford 2 – 1 Leicester

West Brom 0 – 0 Everton

Gameweek 20 Analysis

Premier League Matchday 19 Stadium Attendance

Chelsea led the way in stadium capacity percentage with 99.8% of the stadium filled as 41,568 fans flocked to their boxing day fixture, closely followed by Newcastle fans who watched their team play league leaders Manchester City. Unsurprisingly, Manchester United’s attendance of 75,046 was the highest by a distance with Tottenham second nearly 20,000 behind despite a stadium capacity percentage of 61.6% in their temporary 90,000 seater home.

Premier League Gameweek 19 Matchday Revenue

Despite their lowly stadium capacity %, Tottenham led the way with gate receipts with takings of over £1.3m, in part due to their high ticket prices of £55 and the fact they only sold 28,000 season tickets for Wembley, meaning a more matchday tickets on sale equating to a higher taking each matchday.

Premier League Matchday 19 Home Revenue

Liverpool’s season ticket sales of 25,000 also allow them to benefit from more expensive matchday tickets. Manchester United and Chelsea complete the top 4 this week with Manchester United’s lower due to the 55,000 season tickets sold. These amounts are more secure, so there is always a trade off between the guaranteed selling of season tickets and the potential for empty seats on matchday.

Bournemouth’s 11,360 seat stadium, combined with season ticket sales of 7,000 mean their takings from games are low, something they will be hoping to rectify after stabilising in the Premier League.

Premier League Matchday 19 Away Revenue

For away teams the revenue is usually fairly balanced, with the away allocation always fairly similar. All premier league teams agreed to cap away ticket prices to £30, with Arsenal even taking it a step further at £26. Southampton playing away to spurs were allocated the full 3,000 meaning they lead the way in away matchday revenue, followed closely by Brighton, Burnley Manchester City and Swansea – who all played teams with stadium capita of over 45,000. West Ham lag the rest by far, playing at the smallest stadium in the top flight by far, Bournemouth’s Vitality Stadium which boasts 11,360 seats. West Ham were only given an allocation of 2,000 seats.

Thats it for the first week of this matchday money series – any feedback would be greatly appreciated as we continue to refine the formula to get as accurate a read on matchday takings.

Please follow and like us: