SKD Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 1 hour ago, Noodles34 said: you missed the sarcasm mate, the happy clappers would have you believe that, as far as i think, he'll go for better money and a bigger club, just like 99% of the others Yeah missed. But you can never tell on this place... RE the 9% loan, it could be worse. Burnley have taken a similar Loan on (apparently) similar terms, just to buy the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 1 hour ago, Noodles34 said: you missed the sarcasm mate, the happy clappers would have you believe that, as far as i think, he'll go for better money and a bigger club, just like 99% of the others I always remember reading on here in the early days of Cortese when we were on our unstoppable march to the champions league in our 45,000 stadium with a team of academy graduates how they would all turn down move to bigger clubs so they could fulfil their dreams of playing in the champions league with their mates from the academy. How top players would turn down bigger clubs because we were near the sea, near London but not too close, near the new forest and Southampton has some of the best schools in the country. Anyone who pointed out this was a load of horse shit was dismissed as a troll with an anti saints agenda and a Dell sized mentality. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintMB Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 Champions league or bust! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 All those saying we now need to sell Ings, Vestergard etc seem to be forgetting one important factor - until normality returns the majority of teams are going to be in similar position to us, if not worse. Who will have the money to buy them? I can see this January and the summer transfer window (whenever that happens this year) being the quietest ones ever as most clubs concentrate on simply steadying the ship. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chocolate Box Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 6 minutes ago, Wurzel said: All those saying we now need to sell Ings, Vestergard etc seem to be forgetting one important factor - until normality returns the majority of teams are going to be in similar position to us, if not worse. Who will have the money to buy them? I can see this January and the summer transfer window (whenever that happens this year) being the quietest ones ever as most clubs concentrate on simply steadying the ship. Quite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca155 Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 Those accounts make for grim reading but no surprises considering the current environment. Saints have been hit hard as the hangover from the transfer fiasco simply won't go away. I presume the loan is standard business and whilst 9% seems high, it won't be crippling will it? I mean the interest payments are only half season ticket income for the year 😵 It will be ok if Saints maintain EPL membership as TV money will make it easier to manage. The aim must be to buy the club time to whether the Covid storm. As unpalatable as it is, if I was the CEO I would have to consider selling Vestergaard and Ings. They are the two main assets after JWP and Ralph himself, but they are priceless. Danny and Jan could be replaced, I don't like it but if that means the club finally throws off the financial straight jacket then so be it. Ings, as fantastic as he is, rides the roller coaster of injuries. He may well be riding his luck at the moment and there is a case to be made for cashing in. Jannik is proving to be a diamond, but CHs are not as difficult to replace. Once again a bitter pill to swallow if either are sold, but I'd rather that than go through the agonies of administration again. Whatever happens Ralph has to be involved in the decision as we don't want to lose him. Before that happens the club really need to clear out the dead wood and reduce the wage bill. One example is Bertrand, his wages will be high and perhaps it is time to let Vokins grow into the LB position. If Ralph isn't going to use Forster, Gunn, Hoedt, Lemina, Elyounoussi, Obafemi, Slattery, Sims, Hesketh, then sell and bite the bullet on any losses. That will at least free up cash for wages and allow the club to go forward. Targeted transfers like Diallo are the way forward and hopefully some youngsters to start making an impression. As supporters we really do have a responsibility to create an environment that allows players to flourish. I really learnt my lesson with Vestergaard, I usually am prepared to support players like Stephens, JWP, and Redmond, they take time to develop and won't be brilliant every game, but once confidence grows they can become real assets. All I saw with Jannik was bambi on ice, a CH prone to mistakes, and I joined in with the moans. There were a lot of fans (me included) queing up to give him a lift to Leicester for £35m last year. Memo to self, don't make rash judgements. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca155 Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 8 minutes ago, Wurzel said: All those saying we now need to sell Ings, Vestergard etc seem to be forgetting one important factor - until normality returns the majority of teams are going to be in similar position to us, if not worse. Who will have the money to buy them? I can see this January and the summer transfer window (whenever that happens this year) being the quietest ones ever as most clubs concentrate on simply steadying the ship. Very important and valid point, however I don't think anyone is saying sell Ings and Vestergaard. It is more a case of accepting it if there is no alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verlaine1979 Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 I suppose its feasible that if the world economy has recovered and capital markets are a bit more optimistic by the time it becomes due, we could refinance the $80m on more favorable terms with another lender. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystic Force Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 In a rational market the value of good and services would adjust to the available income streams to cover it. However football is never rational so we are probably all f...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 5 hours ago, nta786 said: I think so too. But why can’t we have the 1%... Vardy stays loyal to Leicester and yet we may not be able to convince Ings Ings would stay loyal to us if we won the league and were in and around the top 6 two or 3 years running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 I'm not sure if it's as bad as it seems. A big chunk of the loss is deferred broadcasting revenue, which will appear in the next accounts due to the delayed season end. Another big chunk appears to be a £10m write-off of player contracts because it is deemed unlikely they will ever play for the first team. I presume that's Carillo. Match day income was only down £3m. I'm not sure why we needed such a big loan. Perhaps we have outstanding transfer payments due soon before we are due to receive any. The interest rate does seem rather high. I don't see a huge cause for concern. The main concern long-term will be if there is transfer fee deflation due to Covid and general economic malaise because we seem to be banking on a couple of decent sales to cover our longer term liabilities. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintsLoyal Posted 13 January, 2021 Share Posted 13 January, 2021 The situation is manageable, if we remain in the PL and get back fans next season. The big problem atm is the disaster of paying remaining transfer fees on players that failed. Boufal, Carrilo, Lemina and Elyounousi for example The issue with Danny Ings is that his value is reducing due to contract length and that due to covid finances interested clubs wouldnt be able to match our selling price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodles34 Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 17 hours ago, nta786 said: I think so too. But why can’t we have the 1%... Vardy stays loyal to Leicester and yet we may not be able to convince Ings Vardy is a slight exception but whilst we have been avoiding relegation over the last few years, he’s been champions and europa leaguing it. and aside from Arsenal a few years back, who has really done in for him? It may well be that no one will come in for Danny. It’s hard to see him as top striker at a top 6 club and so are the lives of Spurs or Chelsea going to shell out 30 million on a bench player? Be more worried about JPW going to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkeith Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 People are missing the fact that the TV and prize money from sky £30 Million odd was paid outside of the accounting period, so that almost halves the losses. Still bad, but not Rupert Lowe firesale bad. That would significantly lower the wage/amprtisation ratio as well. Hughes/Bowen et all will also be off the wagebook at the end of this season, so that takes another £3 or £4 million off of the wage bill. Hoedt to Lazio would help too, if they can agree terms. It is not good, but it the sooner that 2025 loan gets paid down the better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 2 hours ago, Noodles34 said: Vardy is a slight exception but whilst we have been avoiding relegation over the last few years, he’s been champions and europa leaguing it. and aside from Arsenal a few years back, who has really done in for him? It may well be that no one will come in for Danny. It’s hard to see him as top striker at a top 6 club and so are the lives of Spurs or Chelsea going to shell out 30 million on a bench player? Be more worried about JPW going to be honest. You say that, but City and Everton are currently playing without a striker, and I think Ings is better than Abraham, Lacazette, DCL, Jesus. He wouldn't be first choice at Man Utd, Spurs or Liverpool, but I could see him being first choice at Chelsea, (depending on what they decide to do with Werner), Arsenal or City. He'd be first choice at Everton or Wolves, West Ham too. They're the only ones that are realistically going to have money to pay for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodles34 Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 1 hour ago, Saint Garrett said: You say that, but City and Everton are currently playing without a striker, and I think Ings is better than Abraham, Lacazette, DCL, Jesus. He wouldn't be first choice at Man Utd, Spurs or Liverpool, but I could see him being first choice at Chelsea, (depending on what they decide to do with Werner), Arsenal or City. He'd be first choice at Everton or Wolves, West Ham too. They're the only ones that are realistically going to have money to pay for him. If he goes to West ham then we may as well just give up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 On 13/01/2021 at 01:22, Dark Munster said: 9.14% interest ... WTF?? Meanwhile Tottenham took out a £150m Bank of England loan with 0.5% interest 😅 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 23 minutes ago, Noodles34 said: If he goes to West ham then we may as well just give up Agree, but they are a bigger club than us, and spend money left right and centre, even if they are a mess of a club. Can't see it happening mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusic Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 It would be peak Saints to buy Ings as an injury prone but talented player with something to prove, for £20m, see him develop into one of the PL's best strikers and then be forced to sell him for approx £20m. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 (edited) On 13/01/2021 at 10:13, SKD said: I highly suspect in the summer, yes (unless we get into champions league.. unrealistic). Wether we get 20m or 40m will depend on if he signs a contract. It could be that he signs and we still only get 20m. As I understand it, currently playing hard ball on release clause which is all that’s outstanding for him to sign it. Only my opinion, but can’t see him sticking around if he’s pushing so hard for a get out clause. I could easily see this coming summer being similar to that of 2013 when our squad was decimated. If it comes to it, we should sell ings whilst we can and get the money in for him. Then go and get someone like Daka and be proactive. I love ings and he is a quality player. But he is starting to get old, he has injury niggles, and his value will only decrease from here on. If he wants a release clause that means he's already thinking about leaving (and no issue with that - its fair enough especially give the above points), but saints have to do what is best for us as well. By this, i mean sell him when we want strategically, not wait until an offer comes in and then potentially miss out on other players. 22 hours ago, the saint in winchester said: Wow, this was a sobering read. So it seems whereas some clubs laid off staff, or furloughed them, we carried on paying everyone in full. I thought that meant we were in good shape financially, but now it seems we simply took out an onerous hardship loan. Although the loan is only repayable in 2025, we have to pay 9% interest on that annually for the next 5 years (c.£8m interest). With no in-stadium support, we are looking at TV revenue and merchandise, primarily. Unless football can get a better deal off TV companies, clubs are in trouble. For us, the tables are turned. We now NEED to sell Ings, Vestie and JWP in the next 5 years to realise £80M to repay the loan. This is business. N'Dululu, Tella and co are going to be our future. This is a step we need to take, and we will grow again. Lots of clubs will be going through this organic change too, so we won't be alone. We will rise, selling our young players and bringing through new ones. In fact, we'll be better than most clubs through our academy. Unless a new owner appears and has £100M to pay off our debts? Unlikely. Fasten your seatbelts, then ... Technically i'd have thought we can just restructure and service the debt / pay it down slowly? Ultimately the issue is that most clubs are going to be in serious trouble financially - and trying to raise funds whilst not spending much..... So i personally don't expect there will be much wonga sloshing around to justify transfer values like we've seen before. Or perhaps only in the cases of financially flush clubs. I'd expect to see a reduction in average transfer spend / spending trends. Edited 14 January, 2021 by Saint86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 It will be interesting to see how rival clubs in the Prem and other Divisions, and also abroad, are coping financially. Spurs is an interesting one having to deal with near £1 billion outlay on their new stadium. Everton is another case in point as they have splashed the cash and have aspirations of a £500m new ground. However both clubs seem to have owners with deep pockets. Maybe all this will bring about a more sensible view of transfer fees and players wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFHP Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 21 hours ago, Turkish said: I always remember reading on here in the early days of Cortese when we were on our unstoppable march to the champions league in our 45,000 stadium with a team of academy graduates how they would all turn down move to bigger clubs so they could fulfil their dreams of playing in the champions league with their mates from the academy. How top players would turn down bigger clubs because we were near the sea, near London but not too close, near the new forest and Southampton has some of the best schools in the country. Anyone who pointed out this was a load of horse shit was dismissed as a troll with an anti saints agenda and a Dell sized mentality. You forgot to add that to justify the 45000 stadium our catchment area went as far west Plymouth, Bristol as far north as the M4 and as far East as Crawley and fans would all flock to Southampton to see this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKD Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 1 hour ago, Saint86 said: If it comes to it, we should sell ings whilst we can and get the money in for him. Then go and get someone like Daka and be proactive. I love ings and he is a quality player. But he is starting to get old, he has injury niggles, and his value will only decrease from here on. If he wants a release clause that means he's already thinking about leaving (and no issue with that - its fair enough especially give the above points), but saints have to do what is best for us as well. By this, i mean sell him when we want strategically, not wait until an offer comes in and then potentially miss out on other players. I tend to agree. Personally, I don’t think ings will ever replicate the form he has had for the past year / 18 months. I think the club are conscious of that as well, which is why they’ll offer him a bumper contract with a get out clause to protect his value. The only issue is if his form drops off a cliff or if he gets a serious injury, we’ll be stuck with a player on for our standard, very high salary with little return. Due to the above that you’ve highlight he’s never going to be worth any more than 30-40m maximum really. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwertyell Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 1 hour ago, Dusic said: It would be peak Saints to buy Ings as an injury prone but talented player with something to prove, for £20m, see him develop into one of the PL's best strikers and then be forced to sell him for approx £20m. And then pay Liverpool a 25% sell on fee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodles34 Posted 14 January, 2021 Share Posted 14 January, 2021 jeez, people want to sell Ings to get decent money which will either: reduce our ST prices Give us free beer inside the stadium Profit split between all fans or spent on another Carrillo/Long/Mayuka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 15 January, 2021 Share Posted 15 January, 2021 20 hours ago, IFHP said: You forgot to add that to justify the 45000 stadium our catchment area went as far west Plymouth, Bristol as far north as the M4 and as far East as Crawley and fans would all flock to Southampton to see this happen. Ah that infamous catchment area, thank you for reminding me of the coach loads of fans that will be coming from places such as Truro, Cirencester and Hastings to get their fix of premier league football. If you didn't believe this was going to happen you weren't being realistic, you were negative, anti-saints, with a Dell sized mentality, no ambition happy for us to always be in a stadium too small for us never fulfilling our potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the saint in winchester Posted 15 January, 2021 Share Posted 15 January, 2021 On 13/01/2021 at 15:45, Wurzel said: All those saying we now need to sell Ings, Vestergard etc seem to be forgetting one important factor - until normality returns the majority of teams are going to be in similar position to us, if not worse. Who will have the money to buy them? I can see this January and the summer transfer window (whenever that happens this year) being the quietest ones ever as most clubs concentrate on simply steadying the ship. Yes, you're right. Only the super-rich will be able to continue without breaking stride. Indeed, although we will need to sell our top players, you're right to point out other clubs won't be looking to buy. Contracts will have to be re-negotiated. A lot of clubs have commented recently they are looking to reduce playing staff, not increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 15 January, 2021 Share Posted 15 January, 2021 On 14/01/2021 at 12:00, spyinthesky said: It will be interesting to see how rival clubs in the Prem and other Divisions, and also abroad, are coping financially. Spurs is an interesting one having to deal with near £1 billion outlay on their new stadium. Everton is another case in point as they have splashed the cash and have aspirations of a £500m new ground. However both clubs seem to have owners with deep pockets. Maybe all this will bring about a more sensible view of transfer fees and players wages. Just an update on the Everton situation. They spent £60m this season on new players plus another £50m on plans for their proposed new stadium without a brick being laid. Their owner Moshiri, (like Abromovich at Chelsea) seems to have a bundle of cash available to invest in the club and revenue streams are likely to increase significantly when the shiny new ground is built but it seems that promised financial assistance from the Everton supporting leader of Liverpool Council will not be forthcoming as the gentleman in question has resigned and awaits his day in court. I guess one of the few things we can thank Rupert Lowe for (and the City Council) was finding and funding building of St Mary's. Even allowing for inflation, the reported £32m spent on SMS was a decent deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singapore Saint Posted 16 January, 2021 Share Posted 16 January, 2021 (edited) https://www.footballinsider247.com/southampton-news-maguire-worrying-financial-times-for-saints/ This article strikes me as a good read with numbers and percentages an accountant or finance expert could probably decipher. Edited 16 January, 2021 by Singapore Saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 16 January, 2021 Share Posted 16 January, 2021 On 13/01/2021 at 15:45, Wurzel said: All those saying we now need to sell Ings, Vestergard etc seem to be forgetting one important factor - until normality returns the majority of teams are going to be in similar position to us, if not worse. Who will have the money to buy them? I can see this January and the summer transfer window (whenever that happens this year) being the quietest ones ever as most clubs concentrate on simply steadying the ship. very good point and if you take it would step further, maybe player demanding that huge wage will have to settle for a little less than they would have prior to COVID? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie Posted 16 January, 2021 Share Posted 16 January, 2021 It’s not as bad as it looks. A substantial proportion of the losses are due to player trading. If you look at the loss prior to player trading it’s much lower (£23.5m). There was also much larger exceptions than normal (onerous player contracts etc.) which are roughly £8m more than normal. Then there is the £20m deferral of revenue. If you allow for both of those then we would have been fairly neutral on profit/loss before player trading. So cut transfer budgets back for next few years and keep to broadly spending just what we receive from sales. Get rid of the wage burdens (Hoedt etc), which should reduce wages enough so that we can pay the interest on the new loan. As at the accounts date the new loan is just sitting in the bank (£86m cash in the bank). If we can do some of the above and restrict how much of the £80m we spend then paying it back won’t be so bad. Also worth noting we paid back a previous loan of £20m in this accounts period. I have no doubt that we won’t pay back all of the £80m and will roll some of it into a new loan at a lower rate. There are plenty of worrying things in the accounts but it’s not all bad. There certainly isn’t anything that warrants a fire sale of key players in a depressed market. If we sell players like Ings it will be due to contract positions. Keep the faith. #COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 Probably the most comprehensive analysis you'll get from the excellent Swiss Ramble Twitter account. Strap yourselves in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Curse of St Mary's Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 21 minutes ago, The Cat said: Probably the most comprehensive analysis you'll get from the excellent Swiss Ramble Twitter account. Strap yourselves in. Unrolled thread https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1351064573068140544.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexLaw76 Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 Wages / turnover = 90%?!??? looks like we will have no choice but ship at least 1 big player out in the summer. Ings/vestergaard most likely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 Yup - swissramble always do a decent job of analysing these. I'm taking from that, that although it is pretty bleak, there will likely be clubs way worse than us, and it would have been a mainly normal year for us without COVID. Revenue should take an increase next year, due to the additional TV money recognised in the next accounting period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 Just now, AlexLaw76 said: Wages / turnover = 90%?!??? looks like we will have no choice but ship at least 1 big player out in the summer. Ings/vestergaard most likely I know that figure is the headline figure, but it's always going to be higher with the denominator of that equation (revenue) dropping due to the annual TV money being pushed out into this financial year. It still has to be a concern though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 On 14/01/2021 at 11:34, Saint86 said: Meanwhile Tottenham took out a £150m Bank of England loan with 0.5% interest 😅 didn't Arsenal do the same, and were they (BoE low interest loan) not available to ALL English clubs? Why did we not go that route? Could we not meet their criteria for some reason? I thought you just had to show justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said: Wages / turnover = 90%?!??? looks like we will have no choice but ship at least 1 big player out in the summer. Ings/vestergaard most likely Forster, Lemina, Hoedt, Mo ....that lot first I hope..... even on freebies to clear those wages would be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 1 minute ago, Chez said: didn't Arsenal do the same, and were they (BoE low interest loan) not available to ALL English clubs? Why did we not go that route? Could we not meet their criteria for some reason? I thought you just had to show justification. Less risk I would guess. Saints could go down in their eyes and not afford repayments. Those two will always be top 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 4 hours ago, Saint Garrett said: I know that figure is the headline figure, but it's always going to be higher with the denominator of that equation (revenue) dropping due to the annual TV money being pushed out into this financial year. It still has to be a concern though. do you know how much TV revenue was pushed into the followjng financial year and what would have been the wages to turnover ratio if it hadn't been paid to us later than normal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 Just now, skintsaint said: Less risk I would guess. Saints could go down in their eyes and not afford repayments. Those two will always be top 8. Gotcha. FT says: scheme "only open to larger firms with an investment grade credit rating" https://www.ft.com/content/d0157351-9745-4640-8db3-cfc56a043eab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 18 January, 2021 Share Posted 18 January, 2021 9 minutes ago, skintsaint said: Forster, Lemina, Hoedt, Mo ....that lot first I hope..... even on freebies to clear those wages would be good. Assume Boufal & Carrillo etc were counted in those figures too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 19 January, 2021 Share Posted 19 January, 2021 21 hours ago, SuperSAINT said: Assume Boufal & Carrillo etc were counted in those figures too? Would expect the figures are based on wages paid, rather than including the wages out on loan, depends how the deals are recognised in the accounts. It might be that their wages paid by the other clubs, are classed as revenue by the club, and therefore the wages paid to these players on loan, will be included in that figure. Not clear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 19 January, 2021 Share Posted 19 January, 2021 22 hours ago, Chez said: do you know how much TV revenue was pushed into the followjng financial year and what would have been the wages to turnover ratio if it hadn't been paid to us later than normal? Getting the details from the @SwissRamble post above... Without COVID #SaintsFC revenue would have been £31m higher at £158m, i.e. £8m (5%) higher than prior year (£21m deferred to 2020/21 accounts and £10m foregone). Allied to £2m net cost saving, the loss would have been “only” £43m, around the same as 2018/19. #SaintsFC wage bill slightly decreased by £1m (1%) to £114m, which means that wages have been essentially flat for the last 4 years, but over that period the wages to turnover ratio has worsened from 62% to 90%, due to the fall in revenue. So without COVID you'd be looking at about 72% wages ratio, which is seen pretty healthy I think. Looks like £21m will show up in next years accounts, which if recognised this year, would have given us more like £114m / (127m+21m) = 77%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 24 January, 2021 Share Posted 24 January, 2021 Kieran Maguire: "The difference with Southampton is that they wouldn’t have qualified for the same loans because they have been losing money in recent years and they wouldn’t have ticked the good financial management box." "The Bank of England is looking at the risk involved when it considers these loans." “Also from a risk point of view, they are having a fantastic season but if you were looking at the start of the season at the pool of clubs who could potentially go down, Southampton would probably be in that group." “They have been fantastic so far and are deservedly at the top end of the division, but if I was a lender I might be thinking: ‘What happens if Danny Ings leaves in the summer? He’s been instrumental for them.’ If he and Ward-Prowse leave, you could see them being down there again.” https://www.footballinsider247.com/southamton-news-finance-expert-banks-see-saints-as-high-risk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now