Premier League Finances (Everton 7th in basically everything)

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Premier League finances: the full club-by-club breakdown and verdict

Club accounts for 2017-18 show Manchester United spent the most on wages while champions Manchester City had the third-highest bill

www.theguardian.com

Everton
Turnover £189m (7th highest in the league, up from £171m)
Wage bill £145m (7th highest, 77% of turnover, up from £105m)
Loss before tax £13m (follows £31m profit)

Ownership Farhad Moshiri via Blue Heaven Holdings: 68.56%; Bill Kenwright: 5%; other shareholders: 26.44%


Gate receipts £16m


TV and broadcasting £130m


Sponsorship, advertising and merchandise £21m


Other commercial £22m


Net debt £66m


Interest payable £6m


Highest-paid director Unnamed: £927,000


State they’re in With Everton straining to stay with the top six, Moshiri increased his interest-free loan to £150m during 2017-18, then provided a further £100m, and the club had £75m other loans. Future hopes rest on a new stadium at Bramley Moore Dock; £11m was spent on plans.

Interestingly, Liverpool spend more on wages than Man City do

 

[anton66]

Interestingly, Liverpool spend more on wages than Man City do

I'm sure the tax inspectors over on rawk will have a different spin on this.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Proof that we slightly underachieved this season.

Shot in the arm for those who say anything below 7th next season is still acceptable - club has to start pushing forward especially with the backing in the transfer markets from the owner.

 

[Tel001]

Premier League finances: the full club-by-club breakdown and verdict

Club accounts for 2017-18 show Manchester United spent the most on wages while champions Manchester City had the third-highest bill

www.theguardian.com

Interestingly, Liverpool spend more on wages than Man City do

Who’s the director on nearly a mil a year ?

 

[toffeeblue9]

Proof that we slightly underachieved this season.

Shot in the arm for those who say anything below 7th next season is still acceptable - club has to start pushing forward especially with the backing in the transfer markets from the owner.

I don't think it's proof of that at all tbh

Had Brands and Silva been here for three years, I would agree, but the fact remains that the majority of those wages are being spent on a load of poor to average players that the last regime saddled us with. You can spend as much money as you like, but if you buy badly, the money doesn't mean a great deal

 

[Tel001]

Proof that we slightly underachieved this season.

Shot in the arm for those who say anything below 7th next season is still acceptable - club has to start pushing forward especially with the backing in the transfer markets from the owner.

When you consider that there is about 35m In wages for players that have Contributed absolutely nothing our wage turnover would actually look ok if we can cast them off

 

[ForeverBlue92]

I don't think it's proof of that at all tbh

Had Brands and Silva been here for three years, I would agree, but the fact remains that the majority of those wages are being spent on a load of poor to average players that the last regime saddled us with. You can spend as much money as you like, but if you buy badly, the money doesn't mean a great deal

I agree however clubs like Wolves and Leicester hardly have squad depths of quality and we would not improve with any of their deadwood.

My point kinda is yes we have alot of deadwood but so does every club outside the fabled top 6 - the fact remains we are 7th in revenue, top 6 in money spent on players and moving to hopefully a top class stadium.

We simply have to start showing progression and getting back into Europe/competing for trophies.

 

[Groucho]

Premier League finances: the full club-by-club breakdown and verdict

Club accounts for 2017-18 show Manchester United spent the most on wages while champions Manchester City had the third-highest bill

www.theguardian.com

Interestingly, Liverpool spend more on wages than Man City do

I'm sure the tax inspectors over on rawk will have a different spin on this.

Yeah but if you apply tax laws from 1860, Man City spend more.

 

[Saint Domingo]

Who’s the director on nearly a mil a year ?

Could be Brands now he’s moved up to the board.

 

[toffeeblue9]

Could be Brands now he’s moved up to the board.

That's a good point - be surprised if we are paying him less than a million per year though

 

[toffeeblue9]

I agree however clubs like Wolves and Leicester hardly have squad depths of quality and we would not improve with any of their deadwood.

My point kinda is yes we have alot of deadwood but so does every club outside the fabled top 6 - the fact remains we are 7th in revenue, top 6 in money spent on players and moving to hopefully a top class stadium.

We simply have to start showing progression and getting back into Europe/competing for trophies.

You're right, no arguments there. I'd simply caveat it by saying that the progression can only go hand-in-hand with more sensible spending on players. Paying 150 million per year or whatever to a load of poor players and finishing 8th isn't actually under-achieving. It misses the point. We are certainly under-performing vs what we spend, but it wouldn't be as simple as saying Silva should be doing better. For us to see what we spend reflected in how we do, every area of the club involved has to perform to that sort of level - that includes the recruitment staff and everyone else involved who has an impact on what we see on the pitch