Football Finance Thread

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Hello my fellow cocks,

It can no doubt be said that finances have been frustrating us recently. We have built a huge stadium which has been delayed to infinity and have had to sit through a summer of almost no activity. We watch as stingy wages cause discontent and drive out players. We have seen our best players sold on to more financially loose clubs.

But allow me to flip this on it's head. We should be very proud of how our finances our managed. Not just because we have the least spend of all the top clubs, and have become a big player in English football without a sugar daddy or huge inbuilt advantage (*cough*, united, *cough*). Not only is this impressive, but it could become very important, very quickly.

I have grown increasingly suspicious of how clubs have been spending over the past few seasons. I agree with Levy that it is unsustainable. Higher and higher spending has been engaged with on the basis that TV money will continue to rise. Much of this is debt based, in other words the most dangerous way to spend.

I am an econ/finance student in real life, so I'll give you a quick rundown on debt. It's great, until it isn't. Everything being equal, debt is great as it allows you to make more money than you would otherwise have been able to. The problem is things never remain equal, and when things take a downturn debt quickly becomes unmanageable.

You are all familiar with Leeds's collapse at the turn of the millennium. It happened because they borrowed and spent on the basis of achieving champions league football. Initially this worked great, until they finished 5th one season and, well, you know the rest.

Also around that time many football league clubs nearly went belly up after borrowing on the expectation of more money from ITV digital. When ITV digital collapsed they were unable to service their debt. The whole football league was nearly wiped out.

We like to imagine finance is a little different in football than in real life, but it isn't. The collapse of LTCM happened because they had models which didn't properly grasp risk. Lehman brothers took out huge debt to finance what they thought were risk free assets (CDOs). When it turned out they weren't risk free and they began to collapse, we were served up the largest corporate bankruptcy in history.

The risk for premier league clubs is their dependence on TV money and the expectation that it will continue to rise. I am not going to stand here and tell you that tv money is going to fall next year, or ever. All I am saying is that it is highly risky for clubs to be basing their model on TV money and debt. If there is a rare event, and the longer time goes on the more likely it becomes, they will be hit badly. On the other hand, clubs that have focused on managing debt, keeping their wage bill down, turning over profit and diversifying their revenue streams (like, say, building a new stadium to increase matchday revenue) will be able to resist such shocks.

Basically, when everything is good its hard to appreciate good financial management. This is true everywhere, including sports. It's only when things take a downturn that you see who was being smart and who was being reckless. In the words of Steve Eisman (the main character in the Big Short) people constantly '[mistake] leverage for genius'.

As I said, this is just a theory. I could be wrong about all this. But I hope I have given you a new perspective about our often frustrating thrifty ways.

Feel free to attack me below and discuss football finances in general.
 
Forecasts 18/19


Woolwich - £29m LOSS

Aston Villa - £14m LOSS

Bournemouth - £29.8m LOSS

Brighton - £13.4m LOSS

Chelsea - £34m PROFIT

West Ham - £22.4m LOSS

Leicester - £8.1m LOSS

Norwich - £37.8m LOSS

Southampton - £35.1m LOSS

Liverpool - £36.2m PROFIT

Wolves - £37m PROFIT

Watford - £13.9m PROFIT

Burnley - £11.1m PROFIT


Sheffield United - £4.3m LOSS

Crystal Palace - £39.2m LOSS

Man United - £27.1m PROFIT

Everton - £108.6m LOSS

Newcastle United - £45.9m PROFIT

Man City - £52.8m PROFIT

Tottenham Hotspur - £150m PROFIT
 
Forecasts 18/19


Woolwich - £29m LOSS

Aston Villa - £14m LOSS

Bournemouth - £29.8m LOSS

Brighton - £13.4m LOSS

Chelsea - £34m PROFIT

West Ham - £22.4m LOSS

Leicester - £8.1m LOSS

Norwich - £37.8m LOSS

Southampton - £35.1m LOSS

Liverpool - £36.2m PROFIT

Wolves - £37m PROFIT

Watford - £13.9m PROFIT

Burnley - £11.1m PROFIT


Sheffield United - £4.3m LOSS

Crystal Palace - £39.2m LOSS

Man United - £27.1m PROFIT

Everton - £108.6m LOSS

Newcastle United - £45.9m PROFIT

Man City - £52.8m PROFIT

Tottenham Hotspur - £150m PROFIT

A bit more than half of this is due to our run to the CL final.

Not sure what assumption has been made in the estimate for wage increases - I'm pretty sure that there will be some (especially with Ndombele, Lo Celso and Sessegnon joining but only Trippier as an outgoing) plus bonuses for getting to CL final, and the CL bonus may well be pretty significant.

On the upside though, food and drink sales figures seemed to be over £1m per event and given NFL match attendances you'd expect not only the F & B revenues but very healthy merchandise and ticket sales (basic deal seems to have been to rent stadium to NFL but keep ticket money and everything else - great deal for us). Hopefully the same for the rugby match in spring.

The unknowns will include revenues from 'Conferences/exhibitions' (Spurs apparently have the 3rd largest venue in London) and we've seen quite a few such events, but impossible to guess what say the 'Plumbing and Heating Show' brought in (including F & B sales). Additionally I think we have permission for about 25 non football events, and again impossible to guess what these might bring in - although the first big test could come in summer 2020 (summer 2019 was possibly too close to stadium opening to get too many events in) which of course will be accounted for in the next year (ie Y/E 30 June 2021).

Converting the debt into bonds may well by itself save £10m - £20m, a nice added extra.

But all the evidence is that we should be topping last years profits (itself a world record).

Think our bigger problem in the next 12 months will be to identify and buy suitable players : its not that the money isn't there or we are not willing to spend, but its difficult to get players in who are also being wooed by competitors such as ManCity, Liverpool, Chelsea, Woolwich, ManU, Real, Barclona, Atletico Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventus et al.
 
Gordon Taylor on the radio this morning ... Jesus, what a wanker he is.
Any sympathy for professional footballers drains away with every word out of his mouth. If I was the PFA I would get him off the airwaves as soon as possible.
A massive reality check for footballers would be one positive out of this whole thing.
 
Market USA

17529_1000.jpg
 

Link to full PDF is in here:
Sporting Intelligence

TDLR:
Spurs have the 13th Highest Wage bill in world Football (66th highest Sports Club). Suspect, we are currently 11th leapfrogging both Inter and Milan given our recent new contracts handed out, directly behind Liverpool then Woolwich in the football club list.
 
taken from here (PDF)

RANK (LAST YEAR) TEAM - AVG ANNUAL PAY (PER WEEK)

10 (23) Man Utd - £6,534,654 (£125,666)
20 (24) Man City - £5,993,000 (£115,250)
35 (39) Chelsea - £5,020,004 (£96,539)
38 (55) Liverpool - £4,862,963 (£93,519)
39 (48) Woolwich - £4,853,130 (£93,329)
66 (64) Tottenham - £3,515,778 (£67,611)
69 (72) Everton - £3,252,690 (£62,552)
71 (70) West Ham - £3,189,333 (£61,333)
80 (114) Crystal Palace - £2,757,000 (£53,019)
81 (89) Leicester - £2,710,710 (£52,129)
83 (110) Southampton - £2,669,333 (£51,333)
141 (165) Bournemouth - £1,989,520 (£38,260)
157 (169) Watford - £1,775,172 (£34,138)
159 (-) Wolves - £1,757,600 (£33,800)
160 (-) Fulham - £1,727,440 (£33,220)
161 (174) Brighton - £1,695,040 (£32,597)
166 (159) Newcastle - £1,650,133 (£31,733)
168 (172) Burnley - £1,603,197 (£30,831)
181 (187) Huddersfield - £1,238,000 (£23,808)
192 (-) Cardiff - £957,471 (£18,413)
 
What I take from this is that spurs truly are a sleeping giant



Generating nearly twice as much cash as Liverpool. We have the ability in the future to win and win big. If we can win a major trophy CL and or the PL the numbers would explode. Woolwich too are in that position.
 
For those interested, Swiss Ramble put out an epic review of the PL and how it turns the enormous revenue into a relatively paltry amount of cash. It reminds me of my L2 CFA days, and while it’s fascinating reading (again, if this interests you!) it’s a little bit technical I think.

Basically what he does is start with net income, add back the non-cash and remove the expenditures. He also gets into why it is that a club can sell a player today for say £30m and not just have a corresponding £30m to spend on a new player. It’s also interesting to see how reliant clubs are on player sales at this point to keep their cash flow positive.

I’m not going to link all of his posts here, but check out Swiss Ramble on Twitter and there’s a fairly lengthy thread. Spoiler: THFC is in good fiscal condition, although new players this window appears to be unlikely. Woolwich looks pretty pathetic, actually, and that’s really a shame!
 
............cont.







So since 2008 Chelsea have spent £496m on players + CAPEX & we have spent £591m on the two combined.

Yes we have more cash banked than any other club but as the tweets say that is misleading as some of that is based on loans etc.

18% of our funds have come from external loans, which would equate to £150m or so. Deduct the loans as of 2017 and it brings our funds spent on players + CAPEX down to £441m.

The club had, as of 2017 when these figures were released invested £441m of its own money into players & CAPEX. £98m of that on players meaning that £343m of the clubs profits have been spent funding the building of the training ground, stadium, acquiring land etc.

We've basically spent the same amount as Chelsea (they've spent £496m since 2008, we've spent £441m) yet people think the club is sitting on a heap of cash? What I will say is that ENIC have offered very little from their own pockets to fund the club but why should they??? The club is living well within its means, has spent pretty much the same as Chelsea from 2008-2017 & with a further £448m in loans to repay in May 2022 (see Tottenham's Financial results via their website, section 15 for more info or just check out my post on the new stadium thread highlighting it) it's clear one of three things will happen.

One - we will continue to not spend for another 3 summers to clear the debts as quickly as possible

Two - we will extend the dates these loans need to be repaid and find a balance

Three - the owners will put funds into the club which the club in time will pay back to ENIC, similar to the Man U model in order to function whilst we pay of the remaining debt due by 2022.

Either way the club has used £657m of its £837m (£42m loan interest paid is included in this) on player and CAPEX growth, leaving it with £172m in cash to swing its dick at, with £7m paid out in dividends. Compare that to the £53m the directors at Man U have given themselves over a 10 year period that really ain't bad at all.

All in all we are a hugely we'll run club who's owners spend within its means more than any other Premier League club bar Woolwich.

Up until 2017 we'd spent the same on our CAPEX (£343m as Liverpool had on players (£351m). Anyone who still doesn't understand where our money goes really should read these posts, they will offer so much clarity on many grey areas. Excellent post Guido 🇺🇦 Guido 🇺🇦 , thanks for sharing
 
Last edited:

sheet-1-3.png


sheet-1-2.png
I have heard / read the opnion that domestic have stagnated but overseas still to grow - its a view I subscribe to.

Total pot still got a way I think, its why the "big 6" pushed so hard for the split to be less equal, there will be another round of that shortly now they have managed to start the process.
 
EOY1PEzX0AAMBcz


Woolwich have their Addidas shirt deal to add onto this number for (this season), whilst we will expect to post +£100m for match day (I haven't attended a game where I've not spent £20 yet! Am I the only one? I think this is quite a typical number from what I've witnessed) for our first full season in the new stadium. WIth Shirt sleeve, naming rights and events at the stadium still to be added it's incredible that we have a posted a higher commercial revenue than this lot!
 
Saracens would be the rugby equivalent of Chelsea. Got docked 70 (seventy) points!! Relegated at the end of this season for breaking financial fair play rules. If rugby can do it ...
 
Back
Top Bottom