Accounts 22/23

[dnewty]

Great first reply 😂

[Clever Fox]

3 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Think that was Seth Johnson but definitely feels like that’s how we negotiate.

I thought it was Chapman when he moved from Arsenal to Leeds, But I could be wrong.

[Marshall Cockney Fox]

Can someone summarise. Have we been truly awful in our business dealings / acumen? Or just guilty of naively chasing a dream (big club). I don't have the patience to unpack it myself. 

 

Or perhaps the two are interconnected 🤔

[izzymuzzet]

6 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Think that was Seth Johnson but definitely feels like that’s how we negotiate.

Funny how this story has grown legs. The story is that Ridsdale offered 30k, was met with stunned silence by Johnson (who was on about 5k at Derby), then upped his offer to 37k. Both Ridsdale and Johnson have denied the figures, and Johnson said a couple of years ago he wasn't even in the room for the negotiations.

[westernpark]

7 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I thought it was Chapman when he moved from Arsenal to Leeds, But I could be wrong.

I just assumed it couldn’t be Chapman on the basis that 5k was the top ceiling at the time when he would have joined Leeds.

[Fazzer 7]

So does it mean it cost 110 million to sack Rodgers and his staff?

 

The Foxes raised about £70m by selling French centre-back Wesley Fofana to Chelsea in August 2022 and England midfielder James Maddison completed a £40m move to Tottenham last summer.

But those figures were offset by the sacking of Brendan Rodgers and his coaching staff in April 2023, and a lower-than budgeted league position.

[The boy Linacre]

5 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Our wage approach is astonishing 

take Bouba and patson 

 

they would likely have been earning. 20k/week in France and Austria 

 

who on earth thought it made sense to give them 80k/week ?  Surely you max at 50k and if they turn out to be mustard then you can give them a new deal 18 months later 

 

vestergaard at 80k is more understandable given his experience and that he was likely already on 50k at soton. Even then surely he would have signed at 65k.  
 

bertrand at 80k/week is often pointed at for being nuts.  But he was a free and considered himself worth a £3m s/o few. So over two years that 3m is 30k/week.  We’ve effectively bought him for 3m on a two year deal and paid him 50k/week.  We have no idea if there was an option for us to extend his two year deal to three at 50k if he’d worked out. 

 

Our general transfer policy was ridiculous. When players are half way through their contracts you

a) offer them a new deal on a reasonable increase if they have excelled

b)  you sell them and cut your losses if necessary 

you don’t have a policy which doesn’t match the commercial size of the club when there is a psr structure in place that prevents you from spending much more than you can earn.   We won’t know if there was resistance in place from some board members and they were over ruled or out voted. To assume that all of them were fully on board (pardon the pun) isn’t something we can second guess. 

 

 

 

Everything you say is totally right here.  You err on the side of caution AND if you have the SLIGHTEST doubt, you walk away, the choice is plentiful out there.  OR even you get by with what you have and it might be enough.

One player will not decide a teams performance on the levels we have been at in the last 4 years.

Fans/Club get desperate for one player like Sensi for example, yes we have gone backwards BUT promotion is still in OUR hands & we had an encouraging win against one of the Div's better teams on Monday.

Top taking his eye off the ball over 3-4 years, but it may not be his personal/business priority but then his lieutenants need to treat the clubs money not like confetti, and do the job in his absence.

We shouldn't have bumped up Brendan's salary when the press shouted Arsenal, that was why we were stuck with him at the end, maybe we would have got shot earlier and then not gone down, he might even have been more motivated on a lower salary.

Then Fofana got injured & we panicked with the pointless Bertrand & not FPL level Jannik, along with Soumare & Daka, so the transfer purse string owner & chooser, needs to go.

Again Souttar, Kristensen & Tete, were ok to start but not enough to keep us up and Tete was a joke.  Who was responsible for that & the massive salaries mean none will walk & we can't push understandably because nobody will buy.

Get up and get the premier league money, got to be in it to win it, Luton, Burnley & Sheff U have been poor, slight chance we might be better and importantly we buy ourselves time and much additional income to make this better or right.

And the stadium won't be full next season IF we don't go up and all the quality has to be got rid of, and mid or lower table mediocrity beckons, see Stoke.

[StriderHiryu]

3 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

Do you know what the worst part of all of this is? If they had come out in the summer of 2021 and made it clear that finances are tight and that we'd have to cut our cloth accordingly with a big player sale or two and that we need to run a tight ship until we've expanded the stadium and increased revenue by other means, I'm sure most of us would have accepted it and appreciated the transparency and would have altered our expectations accordingly. Most of us would take finishing say 13th in the premier league instead of 5th-8th if it meant that the club was on a stable footing. I'm not saying any of this with the benefit of hindsight, I genuinely would have respected it. Instead we ended up with a £90 million net spend and an even more inflated wage bill when we had sellable assets with the likes of Tielemans, Ndidi, Fofana, Maddison, Barnes and Soyuncu. 

100% this. 

 

As has been said many times, the owners of the club have shown repeatedly that they don't care about us as fans, they treat us as customers. They have provided some incredible memories, but it's a shame they don't realise that the fans would actually have their backs during tough times, if only they could be bothered to talk to us. In a world with the Internet and Social Media, it's just not acceptable.  

 

[Foxoffice]

It’s now become apparent why loan notes where taken against future TV revenue, rather then face the problem head on the board obviously knew the shortcoming and agreed to borrow, the same board who were all making noises about Everton overspending and taking legal action if found guilty, all smoke and mirrors! 
 

Sack the lot of them! 

[Jazzy_Jeff]

5 hours ago, Stadt said:

We're not in this mess because we overspent chasing the dream.

 

We overspent because the decsions makers at the club are inept. Our owner financing has been through loans (with interest) and eventually written off with debt to equity transfers.

 

We didn't gamble by signing loads of players, we've mostly made a profit on player trading, we've had to sell players to fund our runaway wage budget. We spunk money on shit players with long contracts and don't try very much to shift them.

 

We were more of threat to the top 6 when we we ran a tight(er) ship. We operated leaner, recruited well, made shrewd decisions. Instead we tried to run like Manchester United (not Man City) with a similar level of operating income to Wolves.

So you don’t think we’d be in this mess if we had sold Tielemans with 2yrs left on his contract (when his stock was high) and reinvested it as opposed to gambling on keeping him and improving the squad?

[Clever Fox]

I read in the Accounts Top paid off 194 million of the Clubs debts and taken a bigger equity in the Club. Clearly not going anywhere.

[HankMarvin]

20 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I read in the Accounts Top paid off 194 million of the Clubs debts and taken a bigger equity in the Club. Clearly not going anywhere.

Isn’t this a little to do with PSR as well 

 

“However, what makes this slightly more complex is that £90m of the £105m must be covered by “secure funding” from a club’s owners.

Secure funding is essentially “buying up more shares”, rather than an owner simply lending their club money”

[HankMarvin]

57 minutes ago, Jazzy_Jeff said:

So you don’t think we’d be in this mess if we had sold Tielemans with 2yrs left on his contract (when his stock was high) and reinvested it as opposed to gambling on keeping him and improving the squad?

Reinvested in a Soumare mk2 maybe 

Edited 3 April by HankMarvin

[Dan LCFC]

8 hours ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Looks like we are going to need to find a new Pearson esque manager who can come in and build the foundations again on a shoestring and get a team who will run through brick walls for eachother. 
 

This is such a mess, promotion this season is the most important goal of our clubs recent history. 
Go up this season, cut the cloth and accept a hard relegation battle next season, probably resulting in relegation but on a much sounder financial footing. If we go up and Ipswich bottle it, I’d 100% take McKenna and allow him to get relegated and rebuild. 

Basically a manager who can do both his job and Rudkin's job for him. No wonder Rudkin wasn't keen. Was a huge threat to him.

[South Shire Fox]

1 hour ago, Jazzy_Jeff said:

So you don’t think we’d be in this mess if we had sold Tielemans with 2yrs left on his contract (when his stock was high) and reinvested it as opposed to gambling on keeping him and improving the squad?

No one bid for Tielemans for a start?

[eblair]

34 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I read in the Accounts Top paid off 194 million of the Clubs debts and taken a bigger equity in the Club. Clearly not going anywhere.

wasn’t ever getting back so writing it off makes no difference 

 

Kendall Roy has ****ed it royally 

[woody01530]

3 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

I thought it was Chapman when he moved from Arsenal to Leeds, But I could be wrong.

 

3 hours ago, westernpark said:

I just assumed it couldn’t be Chapman on the basis that 5k was the top ceiling at the time when he would have joined Leeds.

Lee chapman joined leeds from forest.

[damolcfc]

This account business....its just a distraction for the new kit thread 🫣🤪

[sm1]

Horrific reading. How Top thinks spending more on wages then we make is good business, only he knows. Thank God Fofana pushed for a move or we'd be 70m more in debt. Didn't Vichai say he wanted the club to be self sufficient, well his son and Rudkin fuched that one up.

[Paninistickers]

6 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

Do you know what the worst part of all of this is? If they had come out in the summer of 2021 and made it clear that finances are tight and that we'd have to cut our cloth accordingly with a big player sale or two and that we need to run a tight ship until we've expanded the stadium and increased revenue by other means, I'm sure most of us would have accepted it and appreciated the transparency and would have altered our expectations accordingly. Most of us would take finishing say 13th in the premier league instead of 5th-8th if it meant that the club was on a stable footing. I'm not saying any of this with the benefit of hindsight, I genuinely would have respected it. Instead we ended up with a £90 million net spend and an even more inflated wage bill when we had sellable assets with the likes of Tielemans, Ndidi, Fofana, Maddison, Barnes and Soyuncu. 

Great post. 

 

But our dear leaders take the north Korea approach to transparency. Never gonna happen 

[Clever Fox]

54 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Isn’t this a little to do with PSR as well 

 

 

“However, what makes this slightly more complex is that £90m of the £105m must be covered by “secure funding” from a club’s owners.

Secure funding is essentially “buying up more shares”, rather than an owner simply lending their club money”

I don't know any of the Rules around FFP as it's a joke to begin with. Designed to protect the big Clubs.

I assume the 105m is the approved loss figure. If he's paid off the losses whats the problem.

Also in the case of a sole owner how does that work when he already owns  100% of his Club.

 

The other issue you might be able to shed light on is Spurs today announced losses of 215 million. How can they set off Depreciation against that figure when Depreciation is a non cash item.

It's a fictional figure and not always appropriate.

[funkyrobot]

12 hours ago, Foxy_jim said:

Well this just isn't true at all. Brighton have stacks of top young players who are worth millions. Pedro, Mitoma, Enciso, Buanacotte and Adnigra off the top of my head would fetch big fees. Fati is not their best player at all far from it. 

All premier league players are worth millions. None of who you’ve listed are worth anywhere near the price that was paid for Cucurella or Caicedo. That’s a fact. Brighton’s model has been sustained by buying cheap and selling very high. They’ll increasingly find it difficult to buy cheap (as everyone knows what they are up to now) and the market for selling players below the very top level for astronomical fees has disappeared. Cucurella went for £65m. That won’t happen again. 

[funkyrobot]

12 hours ago, Tommy Fresh said:

Enciso will go for stupid money, and they have a load that will go for considerably more than they paid for them such as, Buonanotte, Adingra, Baleba, Barco. You've also then got the older players who no doubt would fetch decent fees, Mitoma and Estupinan. They have also got Ibrahim Osman lined up to join who in a few years will also go for more then they've paid.

I’m not disputing the quality of Brighton’s youngsters but we aren’t going to see another Caicedo etc. The bigger clubs are reducing what they spend. The bank of Chelsea has closed, players are increasingly working down contracts. Enciso has only got 2 years left on his contract so that’s going to limit his fee, never mind his injuries and the fact his Brighton stats don’t match your hype. 

[MattFox]

1 hour ago, damolcfc said:

This account business....its just a distraction for the new kit thread 🫣🤪

New Badge coming too

 

[funkyrobot]

13 hours ago, StanSP said:

Buonanotte - £5.3m

Enciso - £9.5m

Valentin Barco - £9m

Baleba - £25m

Mitoma - £2.5m

Adingra - £6m

 

I'm willing to stake that they will see considerable profit on every single one of those players. And that's just a select few.

 

They've absolutely nailed their recruitment over past 4 or 5 years. They'll continue to rake in profits. The question now is can their recruitment model continue to live up to scrutiny over the next few seasons. To be honest, I don't see why it can't. 

Brighton are the most hyped team I think I’ve ever seen. The visuals aren’t matching the talk at least based on what we are all seeing at the moment. They’ve declined as a force this season. Their squad isn’t as good as last year. £25m for Baleba is a massive fee for an untested 20 year old btw, already shows their recruitment model is shifting.