£22m loss 22/23 season

[RollsRoyce]

11 hours ago, aa_bcfc said:

I don’t find it funny at all. In fact I find it rude, embarrassing and totally disrespectful to Jon and the Lansdown family. IMO If they stopped funding the debt we’d be screwed. 

If they stopped funding the debt, they would be screwed. You need to study the accounts. You are miles off. 

BCFC would be far from screwed if the club defaults, in fact putting the club into admin or bankruptcy would elicit a new owner very quickly. 

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said:

If they stopped funding the debt, they would be screwed. You need to study the accounts. You are miles off. 

BCFC would be far from screwed if the club defaults, in fact putting the club into admin or bankruptcy would elicit a new owner very quickly. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

It could elicit an owner quickly but it could also be a bad bad scenario..would depend on the complexity, range of debt etc.

Instant-12 and would we need to begin selling for cash flow..depends on the security of the creditors in respect of priority etc.

[RollsRoyce]

9 hours ago, petehinton said:

The last line…

His analysis is flawed, as from the accounts, it is impossible to accurately analyse where the money is being between playing/non playing/stadium etc.  spent.  His quote of weekly wage, if intended for the playing side, is inaccurate. The title player costs is incorrect. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said:

His analysis is flawed, as from the accounts, it is impossible to accurately analyse where the money is being between playing/non playing/stadium etc.  spent.  His quote of weekly wage, if intended for the playing side, is inaccurate. The title player costs is incorrect. 

Good rule of thumb is often 75-80% of wages on the football side but by no means always.

Agree though, on this point Kieran may have jumped the gun a bit.

[Mr Popodopolous]

From a purely P&S perspective not that that is will be a big factor given the likely change of regs.

In a typical year I estimate that our cost base shouldn't exceed our income by £20m. Inclusive of interest.

£13m loss plus £7m in Allowables.

The 13 month accounts, plus the loss on Disposal of Tangible Assets, the allowables probably rise to £8m.

The fact we are losing £22.2m despite and inclusive of the Semenyo profit of £9m isn't great!

I mean we are clear of any issues but that cost base seems to have crept back up a bit again??

[Mr Popodopolous]

I'll caveat it a bit too.

If there was a big one off cost in there ie an Impairment, Provision for Onerous contracts or something else well that would make sense to put it into that season but there really wasn't.

[Hxj]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Does that kinda make sense / add-up???

Looks about right- but are you missing some spreadsheets and data? Again???

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Does that kinda make sense / add-up???

Looks about right- but are you missing some spreadsheets and data? Again???

[Mr Popodopolous]

I'll stick to the accounts bit. Loans from Pula etc.

There is or has been a change from the last year or 2, for the better in some ways.

Spot the difference.. 

[Davefevs]

Swiss Ramble’s view is that the extra month amounted to £5.3m of extra cost and therefore losses.

This decision was taken “to better align with the financial reporting dates adhered to by the English Football League and the wider Bristol Sport Group”.

In financial terms, there was little impact on revenue, as there were no matches played in June, but the change resulted in an additional month of expenses.

On a simple pro-rate basis, this would mean that costs were around £5.3m higher in the reported accounts. Excluding this timing impact would give an underlying loss of £16.9m, i.e. £11.6m lower than the prior year.

Edited December 29, 2023 by Davefevs

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Swiss Ramble’s view is that the extra month amounted to £5.3m of extra cost and therefore losses.

This decision was taken “to better align with the financial reporting dates adhered to by the English Football League and the wider Bristol Sport Group”.

In financial terms, there was little impact on revenue, as there were no matches played in June, but the change resulted in an additional month of expenses.

On a simple pro-rate basis, this would mean that costs were around £5.3m higher in the reported accounts. Excluding this timing impact would give an underlying loss of £16.9m, i.e. £11.6m lower than the prior year.

That's a massive reduction in losses, then I guess with Scott sale in the following year we should be in a very healthy position

[Jerseybean]

https://footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com/2023/12/bristol-city-rely-on-benefactor-owner.html
 

[Davefevs]

40 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

That's a massive reduction in losses, then I guess with Scott sale in the following year we should be in a very healthy position

It brings it down to around my £18m guesstimate.

Thats not to say I was right, because actually revenues were higher than my preduction as were costs, so they balanced each other out!

The Scott sale has decreased the need for SL to fund and ignore FFP for a while.

[Davefevs]

39 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

https://footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com/2023/12/bristol-city-rely-on-benefactor-owner.html
 

Bit naughty, they’ve ripped off Swiss Ramble’s paid-for pages.

[James54De]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Swiss Ramble’s view is that the extra month amounted to £5.3m of extra cost and therefore losses.

This decision was taken “to better align with the financial reporting dates adhered to by the English Football League and the wider Bristol Sport Group”.

In financial terms, there was little impact on revenue, as there were no matches played in June, but the change resulted in an additional month of expenses.

On a simple pro-rate basis, this would mean that costs were around £5.3m higher in the reported accounts. Excluding this timing impact would give an underlying loss of £16.9m, i.e. £11.6m lower than the prior year.

Panic, somewhat, over? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Still doesn't fully explain the wages though, been trying to do some extrapolations but the football wages may have rose a little even 12 months on 12 months but yeah wages and amortisation will look notably healthier in these accounts for 2023-24.

My intiial prediction post the Scott sale was a £5-10m pre tax profit this season albeit that woukd depend on the fee- noises were that it was £25m, may have been £20m based on the Post Balance Sheet events.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Still doesn't fully explain the wages though, been trying to do some extrapolations but the football wages may have rose a little even 12 months on 12 months but yeah wages and amortisation will look notably healthier in these accounts for 2023-24.

My intiial prediction post the Scott sale was a £5-10m pre tax profit this season albeit that woukd depend on the fee- noises were that it was £25m, may have been £20m based on the Post Balance Sheet events.

See @Hxj’s post earlier in this thread, where he mentions that by extending the period from 1/6-31/5 to 1/6-30/6, we incurred two lots of end of season / end of contract bonus payments.  So it’s not just a straight 13/12ths of the wage cist, but 13/12ths of the wages and two lots of bonuses.

Nor will 23/24 mean no bonuses to even it out, there will always be one 30/6 in our reporting period (unless we change it again).

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

See @Hxj’s post earlier in this thread, where he mentions that by extending the period from 1/6-31/5 to 1/6-30/6, we incurred two lots of end of season / end of contract bonus payments.  So it’s not just a straight 13/12ths of the wage cist, but 13/12ths of the wages and two lots of bonuses.

Nor will 23/24 mean no bonuses to even it out, there will always be one 30/6 in our reporting period (unless we change it again).

Thanks Dave, will go back and re-read it.

The 13th month bonus I keep forgetting about. Should look better without doubt in 2023-24 either way.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Still doesn't fully explain the wages though, been trying to do some extrapolations but the football wages may have rose a little even 12 months on 12 months but yeah wages and amortisation will look notably healthier in these accounts for 2023-24.

My intiial prediction post the Scott sale was a £5-10m pre tax profit this season albeit that woukd depend on the fee- noises were that it was £25m, may have been £20m based on the Post Balance Sheet events.

One thing I've always wondered is, if a player signs a contract on let's say 10k a week, does it stay at 10k a week for the duration of the contract? Or does it rise with inflation? 

I'm no expert but what impact has inflation had on these set of accounts? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

One thing I've always wondered is, if a player signs a contract on let's say 10k a week, does it stay at 10k a week for the duration of the contract? Or does it rise with inflation? 

I'm no expert but what impact has inflation had on these set of accounts? 

Depends on the term of the contract. Generally that wouldn't be the norm hut there is nothing to stop clubs and players agreeing what they want really.

I don't see e.g. why some sort of deferred consideration couldn't be a factor...£10k per week in Year 1, £15k per week in Year 2 and abject to clauses and targets rising to £17-18k thereafter..as finances improve, as bigger losses drop off.

As for inflation it's more likely to impact upon energy costs, other general running costs..although minimum wage rising would also have a small impact in scheme of things ie matchday staff or whoever.

Shouldn't impact football wages unless some sort of bespoke clause though.

[Major Isewater]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Bit naughty, they’ve ripped off Swiss Ramble’s paid-for pages.

Is Swiss Ramble like Swiss Tony? 

[Davefevs]

40 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Depends on the term of the contract. Generally that wouldn't be the norm hut there is nothing to stop clubs and players agreeing what they want really.

I don't see e.g. why some sort of deferred consideration couldn't be a factor...£10k per week in Year 1, £15k per week in Year 2 and abject to clauses and targets rising to £17-18k thereafter..as finances improve, as bigger losses drop off.

As for inflation it's more likely to impact upon energy costs, other general running costs..although minimum wage rising would also have a small impact in scheme of things ie matchday staff or whoever.

Shouldn't impact football wages unless some sort of bespoke clause though.

Indeed.  Or younger players might have £x pw for first 10 apps, rising to £y after that, etc.

28 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Is Swiss Ramble like Swiss Tony? 

Swiss Ramble is like making love to a beautiful speadsheet

[ExiledAjax]

55 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

One thing I've always wondered is, if a player signs a contract on let's say 10k a week, does it stay at 10k a week for the duration of the contract? Or does it rise with inflation? 

I'm no expert but what impact has inflation had on these set of accounts? 

Contracts I've seen have automatic pay rises per season, in addition to an increase on promotion or decrease on relegation.

So assuming a 3 year contract signed with a Championship team in summer 2023 you see something like the following for the basic wage.

Season 2023/24:

Championship - £10k per week.

Season 24/25

League 1 - £5.5k

Champ - £10.5k

PL - £50k

Season 25/26

League 1 - £6k

Champ - £11k

PL - £55k

Just example figures but it's done like this rather than have an annual pay review or a % rise per year, whether tied to inflation or not.

Edited December 29, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Contracts I've seen have automatic pay rises per season, in addition to an increase on promotion or decrease on relegation.

So assuming a 3 year contract signed with a Championship team in summer 2013 you see something like the following for the basic wage.

Season 2023/24:

Championship - £10k per week.

Season 24/25

League 1 - £5.5k

Champ - £10.5k

PL - £50k

Season 25/26

League 1 - £6k

Champ - £11k

PL - £55k

Just example figures but it's done like this rather than have an annual pay review or a % rise per year, whether tied to inflation or not.

Graduated pay rises basically.

Definitely could use it to advantage if both parties agree to frontload and backload certain rises for budgetary purposes.. 

No rule against it unlike the amortisation fiddle that Derby did.

Edited December 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Graduated pay rises basically.

Definitely could use it to advantage if both parties agree to frontload and backload certain rises for budgetary purposes.. 

No rule against it unlike the amortisation fiddle that Derby did.

Plus a whole heap of bonuses - loyalty, international appearances, starting XI, sub appearance, unused sub, goal (can be per goal or milestone based), milestone appearance bonuses, basically anything that can be negotiated.

You see the same thing in manager contracts as well.

It's really not rocket science and is similar to many industries. The one quirk in football is relegation and promotion and building that into pay structures.

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Plus a whole heap of bonuses - loyalty, international appearances, starting XI, sub appearance, unused sub, goal (can be per goal or milestone based), milestone appearance bonuses, basically anything that can be negotiated.

You see the same thing in manager contracts as well.

It's really not rocket science and is similar to many industries. The one quirk in football is relegation and promotion and building that into pay structures.

Agreed.

Relegation let's say between the PL and Championship. Probably a downward swing between 25-50% range, anything in between. May also be player by player a bit.

Promotion the other way is interesting, obviously we have seen some huge Promotion Bonuses in recent times...£15m, £20m perhaps even North of that at some clubs.

Beyond that, some basic wage rises built in would seem the norm or expected anyway. 10-20% maybe? (Again PL, Championship my emphasis).

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed.

Relegation let's say between the PL and Championship. Probably a downward swing between 25-50% range, anything in between. May also be player by player a bit.

Promotion the other way is interesting, obviously we have seen some huge Promotion Bonuses in recent times...£15m, £20m perhaps even North of that at some clubs.

Beyond that, some basic wage rises built in would seem the norm or expected anyway. 10-20% maybe? (Again PL, Championship my emphasis).

I guess there can be promotion bonuses from the agreed bonus pot agreed at the start of the season, as well as promotion wage increase???

[sh1t_ref_again]

26 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Contracts I've seen have automatic pay rises per season, in addition to an increase on promotion or decrease on relegation.

So assuming a 3 year contract signed with a Championship team in summer 2023 you see something like the following for the basic wage.

Season 2023/24:

Championship - £10k per week.

Season 24/25

League 1 - £5.5k

Champ - £10.5k

PL - £50k

Season 25/26

League 1 - £6k

Champ - £11k

PL - £55k

Just example figures but it's done like this rather than have an annual pay review or a % rise per year, whether tied to inflation or not.

 

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed.

Relegation let's say between the PL and Championship. Probably a downward swing between 25-50% range, anything in between. May also be player by player a bit.

Promotion the other way is interesting, obviously we have seen some huge Promotion Bonuses in recent times...£15m, £20m perhaps even North of that at some clubs.

Beyond that, some basic wage rises built in would seem the norm or expected anyway. 10-20% maybe? (Again PL, Championship my emphasis).

Often thought the only way of getting rid of parachute payments is to have standard relegation clauses, this would should suggest that it is / could become the norm 

Would love the championship to be on a equal footing, its the thing I dislike most about football, cant think of another such rigged competition 

[Mr Popodopolous]

14 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

 

Often thought the only way of getting rid of parachute payments is to have standard relegation clauses, this would should suggest that it is / could become the norm 

Would love the championship to be on a equal footing, its the thing I dislike most about football, cant think of another such rigged competition 

Already have relegation clauses at most clubs..unsure about the elite.

[Mr Popodopolous]

However yes these relegation clauses need to be higher than they are, or alternatively you could ring fence some of the Parachute cash for general solvency not Profit and Loss, maybe the difference between Parachute v Championship Solidarity.

Could use it to pay off higher earners or pooling Championship and Solidarity cash and paying by EFL divisional weighting combined with say 35-50% cuts on relegation could drastically resolve a host of issues.