Bournemouth 2019 Finances Predicted – Vital-ity Safety

Bournemouth 2019 Financial Predictions

Bournemouth enjoyed their fourth consecutive season in the Premier League, and it was another successful one as they survived (with a few scares along the way), finishing 14th, a slight fall on the previous season (12th).

A run to the League Cup Quarter Finals gave the fans some hope of silverware, however an unimpressive FA Cup campaign finished in the Third Round, meaning the season ended in pretty unspectacular fashion.

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

Let’s delve into the numbers.

Revenue Prediction

AFC Bournemouth 2019 Revenue Prediction

Matchday Revenue

Bournemouth’s matchday revenue was the lowest among Premier League clubs in 2018 at £7m due to a stadium capacity of 11,329 which is ridiculously low for a Premier League club and shows how well the the south coast club are doing to survive fairly comfortably.

Average attendance fell slightly to 10,532, however Bournemouth did have 1 more home game this season due to their League Cup exploits so it is likely matchday revenue will remain at £7m.

Bournemouth have begun looking at boosting matchday revenue by building a new stadium, although this is proven difficult with plans on hold after the club were overly optimisticabout plans to move into a new stadium by 2020.

Broadcasting Revenue

Broadcasting revenue was £120m in 2017/18 after a solid mid table season was combined with poor domestic cup campaigns.

As with many mid table clubs, Bournemouth are heavily reliant on Premier League TV money and this makes up the majority of their revenue.

Premier League revenue was £111m in 2018, 82% of their total revenue and 93% of their broadcasting revenue.

In 2019, Bournemouth finished two places lower in the Premier League and were shown on live TV once fewer, costing the club around £3m as Premier League payments fell to £108m despite an increase in overall distributions.

Bournemouth will expect a similar amount of FA Cup prize money as they exited at the Third-Round stage again.

Whilst they did well to reach the League Cup Quarter Finals, the competition prize money is small and will make little difference financially to Bournemouth.

Based on the above, Broadcasting revenue is likely to fall by around £3m to £117m due mainly to the drop in Premier League payments.

Commercial Revenue

Bournemouth’s commercial revenue increased significantly in 2018, rising from £5m to £8m. Bournemouth can expect another jump in commercial revenue as they continue to consolidate as a Premier League club while the Premier League’s commercial appeal continues to grow.

Bournemouth are slightly limited by their shirt and kit sponsors being in the middle of contracts so will have to rely on growth in commercial partners. Based on this, Bournemouth should see an increase in commercial revenue by around 25% to £10m.

Other Revenue

Bournemouth’s other revenue amounted to £0.5m in 2018 and we expect it to remain at a similar level.

Total Revenue

Overall, Bournemouth’s revenue is likely to be at the same level as 2019 at £135m. Performance in the Premier League, FA Cup and League Cup was similar to 2018 and as such was never going to change significantly.

The fall in Premier League payments is likely to be offset by commercial revenue rises with strong growth of around 40% likely to see revenue actually increasing slightly although it is unlikely commercial growth will reach these levels.

Costs Prediction

AFC Bournemouth 2019 Costs Prediction

Amortisation

Amortisation is a large portion of total costs to a Premier League club and Bournemouth incurred amortisation of £27m in 2018. The signings of Lerma, Rico, Solanke, Mepham and Brooks undoubtedly add significantly to this figure, with the departures of Afobe, Grabban and Gradel offsetting some of this rise in amortisation.

Based on the transfer fees and contract lengths of the new signings and those sold, we expect amortisation to rise by around £9m to £36m for Bournemouth.

Wages and Other Costs

AFC Bournemouth 2019 Wages Prediction

Other expenses such as stadium maintenance, lease costs etc. amounted to £24m in 2018. These costs rose by £1m from £23m in 2017 and we expect a similar rise this year to £25m.

Wages are the most difficult area of finances to predict due to the opaque nature and privacy of these amounts. Bournemouth signed Lerma, Rico, Solanke, Mepham, Brooks and Clyne (on loan) as first team players in 2019 while only Afobe, Grabban and Gradel took anything meaningful of the wage bill.

New contracts were handed to Lewis Cook and Francis which will add to these wages

With these arrivals and we expect an additional £6m of wages to be incurred which will take total wages to around £108m from £102m. This could be larger based on survival bonuses players may have in their contracts.

Total Costs

Based on these additional costs, we expect wages to increase by around £17m from £153m to £170m.

This means that before taking into account transfers, Bournemouth will be losing around £35m, an unsustainable financial position that will need to be addressed by either selling players, further funds from their owners or by boosting revenue.

Transfers Analysis

AFC Bournemouth 2019 Transfers

As mentioned, Bournemouth signed Lerma (£25m), Solanke (£19m), Rico (£14m), Mepham (£12m) and Brooks (£10m) for a combined £80m.

Departing the Vitality Stadium were Afobe (£10m), Grabban (£6m) and Gradel (£2m) for £18m.

This led to net transfer spend doubling to £62m, showcasing the ever increasing ambition of the club as they strive to move up the table.

In 2018, Bournemouth made a profit on player sales of £1m due to low sale activities, this year there were more sales and despite none being earth shattering, profit on players sales should be around £6m, an increase of £5m that will boost profits (or reduce losses).

In terms of transfers fees owed, clubs owe Bournemouth £11m as of 2018 with £6m due in 2019 which will come in handy.

However, Bournemouth owe clubs transfer fees of £38m, of which £27m was due this year, which may affect transfer plans going forward unless revenue begins to rise.

Looking ahead, the sale of Mings and Mousset will boost profit on player sales considerably which should help Bournemouth record a profit in 2020.

Profit/Loss Prediction

AFC Bournemouth 2019 Profit Prediction

Bournemouth made a loss of £11m last year and are likely to record an even bigger one this season. With revenue flatlining but costs likely to rise by around £15-17m, even a rise in transfer sales means losses are likely to increase to around £25m. This is partly due as well to the lack of exceptional income after Bournemouth settled an FFP fine for £3m less than expected in 2018 which won’t be the case in 2019.

These increasing losses may be a theme of 2019 for most mid-table Premier League clubs with the costs of competing in the top flight rising considerably. Clubs look like only recording profits currently based on player sales rather than underlying financial stability.

Bournemouth’s reliance on Premier League revenue is more than most due to the relative size of the club, commercially and stadium-wise. The situation is improving commercially due to the playing style of the club and their continued Premier League presence, while a new stadium would boost matchday revenue considerably with attendance restricted by their current size.

As mentioned, the sale of Mings and Mousset will boost profits considerably and help fund further investment. However, the owner may have to pump additional cash into the club to keep them ticking over and growing.

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

Please follow and like us:
error

AFC Bournemouth 2018 Finances – Howe You Doin’?

AFC Bournemouth Finances 2018

Bournemouth had another solid season in the Premier League, securing their 4thsuccessive season in the top flight following a 12thplaced finish. A Quarter-Final finish in the League Cup partly made up for the club failing to follow up on last season’s top half finish.

2018 saw Bournemouth begin to flex their growing financial muscle, breaking the £20m transfer fee barrier for the first time.

The added investments made led to a £14.0m profit in 2017, turning into a £10.6m loss in 2018, a sizeable swing and their first loss since 2015.

It is worth noting that the figures below are not a direct comparison as 2017 was an 11-month period for Bournemouth who changed their financial year last year. The effect of this was larger on costs than revenue due to most of their revenue being received in that 11 month period, whereas costs were affected far greater, making the increase in costs seem greater than they actually were.

Let’s delve into the numbers.

Bournemouth Profit:Loss 2018

Revenue Analysis

Bournemouth 2018 Revenue

Revenue dissapointingly fell a bit, falling from £136.5m to £134.9m (1%).

Matchday revenue did rise however, increasing from £6.5m to £6.8m (5%) on the back of another impressive season full of good performances. Bournemouth also benefitted from more home games this season after their League Cup campaign yielded 2 additional home games.

Broadcasting revenue dropped from £124.5m to £119.5m (4%) after Bournemouth fell 3 places in the Premier League and this lost revenue couldn’t be offset by their cup performances. This showcases the importance of their Premier League position to their revenue and the club will be hoping they can improve on their 12thplaced finish this season.

Commercial revenue increased significantly, rising from £4.7m to £8.1m (72%) after the club’s commercial strategy paid dividends as they exploited their fairly secure Premier League status. Bournemouth will be hoping they can build on this going forward.

Other revenue fell from £0.8m to £0.5m (38%).

Looking ahead, Bournemouth are likely to see a similar level of revenue next season. Bournemouth’s cup campaigns once again faltered early while they are due to finish around the same position as last year this year. The final league position is likely to dictate whether revenue rises while another jump in commercial income would be welcome and could boost revenue significantly.

Costs Analysis

Bournemouth Costs 2018

Costs increased significantly (even if the longer period is taking into account), rising from £121.4m to £153.1m (26%). Such a rise when revenue was falling hurt Bournemouth’s profitability hugely.

Amortisation was a big mover, rising from £19.6m to £26.9m (37%) on the back of a large increase in player investment as Bournemouth begun to kick on in the Premier League as their ambitions changed.

Lease rental costs fell slightly from £0.9m to £0.8m (11%).

Bournemouth saw their interest costs increase from £1.5m to £1.8m (20%) due to an increase in interest costs on transfer fees paid by instalments.

Bournemouth had no tax to pay due to their loss-making status this year. The loss will also help reduce future tax bills on future profits as the loss could be offset against these profits.

Bournemouth Wages 2018

Bournemouth’s wage bill ballooned this year, rising from £71.5m to £101.9m (43%) as Bournemouth broke the £100m wage bill barrier for the first time. Players were rewarded for another solid season with new contracts, while Begovic and Ake commanded premium wages.

The increase in wages works out an eye-watering £585k extra a week, unheard of for a club the size of Bournemouth, showcasing how far they have come in such a short period of time.

Directors saw their wages rise from £1.4m to £1.7m (21%) after meeting their objectives for the season.

Bournemouth also saw ‘income’ of £2.8m in relation to their 2014/15 Financial Fair Play fine of £7.6m from the EFL. After a long back and forth with the EFL, Bournemouth settled the penalty at £4.8m. Having already recorded the expense previously at £7.6m, they have been able to recognise income of £2.8m to reflect the fall in the charge.

Looking ahead, Bournemouth are likely to see another rise in costs as Bournemouth continue to push ahead and show their new financial muscle. A record transfer season in 2018/19 will see both wages and amortisation rise.

Transfers Analysis

Bournemouth Net Transfer Spend 2018

Bournemouth had a rather quiet 2017/18 transfer season with two signings and no departures.

In came Ake (£20.5m) for a record transfer fee and Begovic (£10.4m) for a combined £30.9m.

With no outgoings this meant their net spend increased from £13.7m to £30.9m (126%) showcasing the increased ambition Bournemouth have shown having consolidated their position as a Premier League club.

Bournemouth went for quality over quantity and it paid dividends as Ake and Begovic both slotted in as key players for the Cherries.

Bournemouth also received £5.2m in loan fees and wages for the likes of Afobe, Grabban and Gradel.

In cash terms, Bournemouth spent cash of £37.9m and received only £6.3m (due to previous season transfers), a net cash outlay of £31.6m.

On top of this, Bournemouth are owed £11.2m in transfer fees while they owe a further £37.5m (of which £26.5m is due this year). This means that Bournemouth owe net £26.5m in transfer fees, although this seems to not have affected their transfer dealings this season.

There could also be a further hefty charge of £29.5m if certain clauses are met in the future. £5.9m of this relates to transfers which will be owed to other clubs while £23.6m is potentially due to Bournemouth players and their agents.

Debt Analysis

Bournemouth Net Debt 2018

Bournemouth are excited at the new era they are entering where they have more financial power behind them. 

The added spending this year saw cash levels fall from £12.7m to £7.7m as their net transfer outlay (31.6m) plus the purchase of new training ground land for development (£3.8m) were funded by Mr Demin who plunged new loans of £16.7m.

The new loans led to debt levels increasing from £52.6m to £69.3m (32%) as Mr Demin showed his new level of ambition have successfully stabilised the club in the Premier League.

All the loans are interest-free and are likely to increase this season as spending continues to grow, this will require further loans to fund their increased transfer activity and the new training ground that is to be built.

Net debt hence increased from £39.9m to £61.6m (54%) as the club look to push forward. The big area the club need to consider for further investment is a new stadium or a stadium expansion due to the constraints their current stadium of 11,000 holds over the club, Bournemouth have the lowest matchday revenue by a distance in the Premier League (it is also less than a lot of Championship clubs).

Bournemouth are in a good place currently, having prudently managed their finances while they adjusted to life in the Premier League and now feel at home and able to invest more heavily without risking their financial future. 

As long as Bournemouth continue to invest smartly and keep hold of Howe, relegation doesn’t seem a worry and they should continue to improve financially, although they should keep a watch on their rising costs which are hurting profitability.

Thanks for reading – Share with a Bournemouth fan!

Please follow and like us:
error

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:
error

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:
error

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:
error

Bournemouth Financial Review 2018

Bournemouth Financial Review 2018

Bournemouth had a good season, finishing in the Premier League top half when survival was always the main target, achieving their highest ever Premier League finish and securing their third consecutive season in the Premier League.

Despite this success, a poor cup campaign reduced the late season excitement once survival was secured, something they will be looking to improve on in coming seasons.

Off the pitch survival told, Bournemouth’s profits soared from £2.4m to £14m after significant losses in the previous 4 seasons prior to last, showcasing the importance of Premier League survival.

Note that Bournemouth changed their accounting period so this period was only for 11 months compared to the usual 12 months, reducing their figures slightly.

Bournemouth Profit:Loss

Revenue Analysis

Bournemouth Revenue

Bournemouth have significant revenue growth with revenue increasing from £87.9m to £136.5m (55.3%) due in most part to the increased Premier League TV deal, with revenue falling in all other areas.

Matchday revenue fell slightly from £6.7m to £6.5m (3%) due to the introduction of the Premier League away ticket price cap (and the 11 month period). Bournemouth always struggle with matchday income due their small stadium size limiting revenue capabilities from this source and will look to find ways to rectify this through a new stadium or expansion.

Commercial revenue worryingly fell from £5.1m to £4.7m (7.8%), something that will need to be improved on if the club want to continue being competitive in the Premier League financially.

Broadcasting revenue soared due to record levels on the back of the new TV deal and a 9th place finish. Broadcasting revenue rose from £75.2m to £124.5m, a huge 65.6% increase which further showcases the importance of a good Premier League season to clubs.

Other revenue also fell slightly to £0.8m from £0.9m (11.1%).

Revenue is likely to increase slightly in the coming year, partly due to a full 12 months of accounts compared to the 11 for this season. Elsewhere a lower league finish is likely which will reduce earnings however a EFL Cup Quarter Final may help offset this loss of earnings. Commercial revenue improvements will be crucial and those in charge will be hoping for a good season in this regard.

Expense Analysis

Bournemouth Operating expenses

Bournemouth saw a sizeable increase in their costs over the year as they rose from £94.3m to £121.4m (28.7%) as the club continue to invest in their playing squad.

Amortisation costs rocketed from £13.2m to £19.6m, a huge 48.5% increase after the club’s transfer additions increased the value of their squad as detailed in the next section.

Finance costs fell ever so slightly to £1.5m, all due to the shorter accounting period as finance costs remained stable.

Bournemouth Wages

Wages continued to rise as the Bournemouth sign new players that command more lucrative wages than their existing players as they continue to improve the squad. Wages rose from £59.6m to £71.5 (20%), this represented an extra £229k a week to the club. 

Their highest paid director, likely to be Chief Executive Neill Blake, was paid £1.2m in the year.

The club also only paid £0.7m in tax on their profits, working out as an effective tax rate of 4.8% as the club utilised their losses from previous years.

Bournemouth will expect expenses to continue to rise as the club consolidate their Premier League presence while improving the squad with higher paid players and new contracts to their existing stars.

Transfers Analysis

Bournemouth Net Transfer Spend

Bournemouth spent modestly in the year, seeing 7 players join the club and 7 leaving in what seemed to be an 1 in, 1 out policy.

Incoming were Ibe (£16.2m), Cook (£6.3m), Mousset (£5.9m), Smith (£3.2m), Wilson (£2.1m), Ramsdale (£0.8m) and Wilshere on loan (£2.1m) for a combined fee of £36.6m.

Out went Ritchie (£10.8m), Elphick (£3.5m), Murray (£3.2m), Tomlin (£3.2m), Rantie (£1.6m), O’Kane (£0.5m) and MacDonald (£0.3m) for a combined £22.9m.

This saw Bournemouth finish the season with a net spend of only £13.7m, considerably down from last year’s net spend of £49.0m – a 72% drop in spending.

This didn’t stop bournemouth from recorded their highest league finishing despite their new young signings struggling to bed into the squad with their best yet to come.

The club also recorded a loss on player disposals of £1.2m compared to last year’s £10.7m.

The club paid out £25.2m in cash with respect to these and previous transfers while only receiving £5.1m cash from players they have sold, this was still more than the big fat zero they received last year.

Assets/Liabilities Analysis

Bournemouth Net Debt

As Bournemouth strive to improve and be financially competitive, Bournemouth have spent the surplus cash reserves built up as cash levels dropped from £33.5m to £12.7m, a huge 62.1% fall in cash reserves. Player purchases and repayments to creditors were the primary uses of these cash as the club settle liabilities and invest in the paying squad.

Debt levels remained relatively stable at £52.6m, the slight fall primarily due to the shorter 11 month period with a small amount of the fall due to repayments on loans exceeding new loans secured by £0.7m.

The plummeting cash levels have led to their net debt position more than doubling from £19.8m to £39.9m (101.5%) which may cause some concern to the club’s supporters however it is necessary for the club to grow.

Bournemouth have also committed £3.8m to improving the club’s facilities as they look to improve the training environment.

The club may potentially be liable to pay £19.5m in future transfer fees should certain clauses be met with only £6.7m receivable should players sold meet certain clauses.

I hope you enjoyed the article, share with a Bournemouth fan!

Please follow and like us:
error

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:
error

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:
error