Everton Annual Accounts Report 2012/2013

[mooseatingnome]

Other operating costs are down. Bill's on to us.

 

[Moomin]

I can't wait to see Joe Beardwoods analysis on the figures this year, always does a good job.

Its possible the new tv money and recent player transfers may be used to decrease the debt to increase the value of the club. Just saying, the likes of Robert Earl will want to maximize his return on his investment.

 

[Big Fat Sam]

Bill must be loaded. Where's the transfer money, Bill?

 

[Walken]

I'd be quite curious to know how weve knocked 5mill off the mysterious other operating costs

 

[mooseatingnome]

I'd be quite curious to know how weve knocked 5mill off the mysterious other operating costs

Bill's taken to stashing cash in his wardrobe rather than spending it on lawnmowers.

 

[Walken]

Bill's taken to stashing cash in his wardrobe rather than spending it on lawnmowers.

shrewd move

 

[Big Fat Sam]

I'd be quite curious to know how weve knocked 5mill off the mysterious other operating costs

No new lawnmovers this year.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The wages situation is interesting. We spent £63.5 million on wages in 2012, down ever so slightly to £63 million in 2013. That still represents a very high figure relative to our turnover, when you consider that a good figure is said to be 50%, and ours is well over 70%.

For all those people saying "what about the TV money..." there is your answer. It's going on wages.

Here are the numbers for 2012 and 2013

2012


We lost around £9 million last year, of which £4 million was interest on debt

2013

This last year, we made a £700k profit on operating business + around £5 million on player trading - the £4 million debt payments, so ended up with a profit of £1.5 million or so

The moral of the story therefore is that most of the we probably have perhaps £13 million surplus after trading and debt this year, minus whatever McGeady cost and whatever we paid for the four loan players we've acquired.I've no idea how much the loan fees are, but considering the Mail are reporting Blackpool getting 250k for Ince, it's perhaps not a stretch to assume that between those and McGeady that £13 million is down to maybe £6-7m.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Must say, I don't get what is confusing about the other operating costs column. The costs are broken down as follows:

Player costs (ie transfer fees)
Staff salaries (obvious)
Depreciation (obvious)
Everything else

I mean do people really believe the only costs involved in running a football club are on people?

 

[Allezfan]

The wages situation is interesting. We spent £63.5 million on wages in 2012, down ever so slightly to £60 million in 2013. That still represents a very high figure relative to our turnover, when you consider that a good figure is said to be 50%, and ours is well over 70%.

For all those people saying "what about the TV money..." there is your answer. It's going on wages.

But the wages have gone done, which is rare in this league.

Given we were only paying the tenth biggest wages in 2012, you'd imagine in 2013 that's even lower.

There's a limit to how good you can be when the teams you're competing with are paying wages 3 times what you're paying, because players will choose them over you everytime.

So basically, we're making more money and yet we're spending less on wages, less on transfers and I think less on agent fees, while everyone else is spending more on all 3.

Ambition: Everton style.

 

[Big Fat Sam]

So basically, we're making more money and yet we're spending less on wages, less on transfers and I think less on agent fees, while everyone else is spending more on all 3.

Ambition: Everton style.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

But the wages have gone done, which is rare in this league.

Given we were only paying the tenth biggest wages in 2012, you'd imagine in 2013 that's even lower.

There's a limit to how good you can be when the teams you're competing with are paying wages 3 times what you're paying, because players will choose them over you everytime.

So basically, we're making more money and yet we're spending less on wages, less on transfers and I think less on agent fees, while everyone else is spending more on all 3.

Ambition: Everton style.

Sorry, the original figure should have read £63 million rather than £60m.

It has to be remembered that last year we made a loss of nearly £10 million. Plus it isn't clear from those figures whether the 500k drop in salaries is on the playing staff or from other staff.

I know most people in this thread have jumped to conclusions based upon their preexisting disposition, but the figures don't really support much either way.

 

[davek]

The wages situation is interesting. We spent £63.5 million on wages in 2012, down ever so slightly to £63 million in 2013. That still represents a very high figure relative to our turnover, when you consider that a good figure is said to be 50%, and ours is well over 70%.

For all those people saying "what about the TV money..." there is your answer. It's going on wages.

Here are the numbers for 2012 and 2013

2012


We lost around £9 million last year, of which £4 million was interest on debt

2013

This last year, we made a £700k profit on operating business + around £5 million on player trading - the £4 million debt payments, so ended up with a profit of £1.5 million or so

The moral of the story therefore is that most of the we probably have perhaps £13 million surplus after trading and debt this year, minus whatever McGeady cost and whatever we paid for the four loan players we've acquired.I've no idea how much the loan fees are, but considering the Mail are reporting Blackpool getting 250k for Ince, it's perhaps not a stretch to assume that between those and McGeady that £13 million is down to maybe £6-7m.

Elstone explained this high % as a result of the way the club accounts for its cost base: they leave out catering and retail turnover so the ratio looks larger. When, as other clubs calculate it, they put them in the % of wages drops to 70%.

 

[nsno-chris]

Must say, I don't get what is confusing about the other operating costs column. The costs are broken down as follows:

Player costs (ie transfer fees)
Staff salaries (obvious)
Depreciation (obvious)
Everything else

I mean do people really believe the only costs involved in running a football club are on people?

People want to believe its some sort of secret slush fund where BK and the Board are taking our millions. Its ridiculous.

Definition:
Other operating costs comrise outsourcing costs, property or equipment rental charges, the cost of raw materials and supplies that cannot be held in inventory (i.e. water, energy, small items of equipment, maintenance-related items, administrative supplies, etc.), maintenance and repair work, insurance premiums, studies and research costs, external personnel charges, fees payable to intermediaries and professional expenses, advertising costs, transportation charges, travel expenses, the cost of meetings and receptions, postal charges, bank charges (i.e. not interest on bank loans, which is booked under interest expense) and other items of expenditure

You don't include all the indiviual costs into a corporate end of year report

 

[Bruce Wayne]

As for the comparisons with others, who exactly are we compared to? Is it the Man City who announced a £50 million loss recently? Or the Chelsea that announced a loss of £49 million?

Maybe it's the Man Utd or Arsenal who make roughly 10 times what we do on match day revenue? Or is it the Spurs who have just received a world record fee for one of their players?

I'd love to know.