are we broke

[d4ky]

You'll soon see

 

[TheFinnFan]

You'll soon see

yes we will see

 

[WA Toffee]

and our squad is ageing as well with pienaar, osman, hibbert, distin all losing half a yard. worrying times

They are only 6 weeks older than when they finished last season. I really don't think they have all lost half a yard of pace in 6 weeks. And since Osman and Pienaar never really had that much pace to start with, don't think it will make much difference

 

[Marquis]

Wouldn't a better question be "how are we broke?". I know little about the business side of football, all I do know is that we're swimming in and out of the top 20 richest clubs in the world each year and made over $50 mil last season. How is it possible to do that and still have no money?

 

[WA Toffee]

Wouldn't a better question be "how are we broke?". I know little about the business side of football, all I do know is that we're swimming in and out of the top 20 richest clubs in the world each year and made over $50 mil last season. How is it possible to do that and still have no money?

Money out > Money in

I think you may be confusing turnover with profit

 

[degsy]

and our squad is ageing as well with pienaar, osman, hibbert, distin all losing half a yard. worrying times

Osman never had half a yard to lose

 

[Marquis]

Money out > Money in

I think you may be confusing turnover with profit

Then these 'rich lists' are pointless. Profit is the only thing that matters. If I make a million dollars and have to pay most of it in tax, I wouldn't consider myself rich.

 

[Ihaters]

Before people start saying we are 6th best team in league... Yea totally agree with you but we won't be next year with teams improving around us. Sad indication really..

Why not? This has been the same situation for over a decade, it can be done consistently, as has been proven. Just have faith that Martinez can do it as well.

 

[SerenityNigh]

I don't want to spoil this conversation with optimism and numbers, but reading The Guardian on turnover* and wage bills, I've found this interesting nugget**.

2011/2012 values, this is the debt as percentage of turnover for each EPL club

Chelsea 336%
Fulham 244%
Bolton Wanderers 211%
Aston Villa 153%
Queens Park Rangers 139%
Newcastle United 139%
Manchester United 114%
Sunderland 108%
Everton 57%
Liverpool 51%
Tottenham Hotspur 49%
Blackburn Rovers 46%
Arsenal 40%
Manchester City 25%
Wigan Athletic 23%
Stoke City 20%
West Bromwich Albion 1%
Norwich City 0%
Swansea City 0%
Wolverhampton Wanderers 0%

I find these to be very respectable numbers for Everton. Obviously, this doesn't make me feel any better about our lack of a top striker or CM being pursued on the transfer market, and I'm not certain that FFP will be enforced in a way that effectively reels in Chelsea, etc, but as to whether the club is "broke," it seems to be operated at a reasonable level of debt.

*I had to look up what turnover is; you brits seem to be confusing a pastry with revenue, but I'll accept that turnover means receivables
**Debt/Turnover % is computed from values published by The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2013/apr/18/premier-league-club-accounts-debt

 

[Allezfan]

Yes but our debt is low because we don't spend any money.

Obviously we're not portsmouth but we're not portsmouth because we've spent less over the last ten years (on wages, on agent fees, on transfer fees etc) than any other club to remain in the premier league in that time period.

A tramp probably has a better debt/turnover ratio than a middle aged man with a mortgage but he's still going to be eating worse food.

 

[SerenityNigh]

Yes but our debt is low because we don't spend any money.
A tramp probably has a better debt/turnover ratio than a middle aged man with a mortgage but he's still going to be eating worse food.

A middle-aged man with a massive mortgage is going to sell his house during the next economic downturn for a substantial loss*. I don't suppose you're suggesting Everton increase its debt, but I'm suggesting (1) maybe the dire straits are over-hyped and (2) maybe the solution isn't as obvious as it sometimes seems.

*I'd love to see FFP rules crash the transfer market for high-debt teams and bring prices back down, but that seems unlikely. I'd probably settle for those sky blue upstarts came back down a little at least.

 

[Allezfan]

A middle-aged man with a massive mortgage is going to sell his house during the next economic downturn for a substantial loss*. I don't suppose you're suggesting Everton increase its debt, but I'm suggesting (1) maybe the dire straits are over-hyped and (2) maybe the solution isn't as obvious as it sometimes seems.

*I'd love to see FFP rules crash the transfer market for high-debt teams and bring prices back down, but that seems unlikely. I'd probably settle for those sky blue upstarts came back down a little at least.

The main problem we have is we simply don't generate enough money to compete without our peers in spending.

Again if you combine wages, agent fees and net transfer spend over the last 3 years we have been outspent by 15 other teams and five teams more than doubled our spend. You can't win the league with that disparity in finances.

Which leads us to problem 2 which is the vast majority of our income is prize money and tv money, our sponsorship deals, match day earnings and merchandise sales are significantly below our peers.

So we are competing vs teams who outspend us 2:1 and if we can't compete at the top with them then we'll lose (in prize money and tv money) a significant part of our income while sunderland, newcastle, liverpool etc can have bad seasons in the league without it effecting their income sources to the same degree.

The debt is a tertiary concern. It would only be a real problem if our income dropped massively, ie we were relegated which doesn't seem likely.

 

[pablo 1878]

The main problem we have is we simply don't generate enough money to compete without our peers in spending.

Again if you combine wages, agent fees and net transfer spend over the last 3 years we have been outspent by 15 other teams and five teams more than doubled our spend. You can't win the league with that disparity in finances.

Which leads us to problem 2 which is the vast majority of our income is prize money and tv money, our sponsorship deals, match day earnings and merchandise sales are significantly below our peers.

So we are competing vs teams who outspend us 2:1 and if we can't compete at the top with them then we'll lose (in prize money and tv money) a significant part of our income while sunderland, newcastle, liverpool etc can have bad seasons in the league without it effecting their income sources to the same degree.

The debt is a tertiary concern. It would only be a real problem if our income dropped massively, ie we were relegated which doesn't seem likely.

As much as we know the issue of our potless board and the zero investment in the club from the major shareholders, are we the fans part of the problem. If we spend so little on merchandise the kit deal is likely to be affected. Consequently shirt sponsorships might not be as lucrative. All of this combined makes us significantly less attractive to new investment. Evertonians pride ourselves on not being replica shirt wearing Sky superfans and instead embrace the whole casuals thing. But is it possible collectively, we are partly responsible for our current position?

<tin hat on>

 

[Michael Tsui]

As much as we know the issue of our potless board and the zero investment in the club from the major shareholders, are we the fans part of the problem. If we spend so little on merchandise the kit deal is likely to be affected. Consequently shirt sponsorships might not be as lucrative. All of this combined makes us significantly less attractive to new investment. Evertonians pride ourselves on not being replica shirt wearing Sky superfans and instead embrace the whole casuals thing. But is it possible collectively, we are partly responsible for our current position?

<tin hat on>

We have zero investment exactly because we have a more global neighbour. Sadly but with the bluest glasses on it is still the fact.

If football in England is operated in a franchise system I can see us quickly banished from the major leagues and settle into a minor league status "for the board of the Liverpool Reds don't like Liverpool Toffees dividing up the market, and everyone know that Liverpool Reds is more marketable".

 

[pablo 1878]

We have zero investment exactly because we have a more global neighbour. Sadly but with the bluest glasses on it is still the fact.

If football in England is operated in a franchise system I can see us quickly banished from the major leagues and settle into a minor league status "for the board of the Liverpool Reds don't like Liverpool Toffees dividing up the market, and everyone know that Liverpool Reds is more marketable".

That didn't scare the arab billionaires away from Man City with possibly the biggest club in world football round the corner