|
MarinerDevil |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,039
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +2,779
Gold Stars: 80
|
Most National League clubs from the 2021/22 season have now filed their financial results, so I thought I’d take a look at how Town compared to our rivals during our brief stay in non-league last year. I’m not an accountant so I’m not going to try to interpret anything technical - this is not a scientific assessment of every club’s financial health, I’m just a sad bástard who finds this sort of stuff quite interesting. The first thing to note is that most clubs at this level take advantage of an exemption for small companies which allows them to avoid providing detailed accounts. Some clubs have pretty much only submitted a balance sheet and little else. Apart from Town, Chesterfield and Wrexham, no one else has submitted detailed breakdowns of turnover, expenditure, etc. This makes it difficult to accurately compare things like wage budgets, but an educated guess is possible. FC Halifax Town and Solihull Moors haven't published their accounts yet, so they aren't included here. RankingsOperating loss | Club | Amount (£m) | 1. | Stockport County | 4.862 | 2. | Wrexham | 2.914 | 3. | Chesterfield | 2.371 | 4. | Dagenham & Redbridge | 1.746 | 5. | Notts County | 1.692 | 6. | Torquay United | 1.190 | 7. | Grimsby Town | 0.931 | 8. | Bromley | 0.851 | Player additions (transfer fees) | Club | Amount (£'000) | 1. | Wrexham | 1,175 (National League record) | 2. | Chesterfield | 483 | 3. | Stockport County | 368 | 4. | Notts County | 227 | 5. | Grimsby Town | 0 | Wages | Club | Amount (£m) | 1. | Wrexham | 3.940 | 2. | Chesterfield | 3.416 | 3. | Grimsby Town | 3.070 | Turnover | Club | Amount (£m) | 1. | Wrexham | 5.972 | 2. | Stockport County | 4.800 | 3. | Grimsby Town | 4.445 | 4. | Chesterfield | 3.928 | 5. | Bromley | 1.739 |
And a more in-depth look at each club (top 7 finishers): 1st Stockport CountyOwner: Mark Stott Investments before or during 2021/22No new shares were issued during the season, however, £7.7m of debt to Stott was cleared in June 2022 in exchange for equity. Infrastructure improvementsDuring the 2021/22 accounting period, the club made £985,756 worth of improvements to property and other fixed assets. Since 2017, £3m has been invested into improvements and additions. This includes “improvements to the pitch, upgraded conference and events facilities, new seating, and training facilities.” In September 2022, the club agreed terms with Stockport Council on a 250-year lease for Edgeley Park and launched a public consultation on its vision for the expansion and improvement of the stadium. The plans include the replacement of two stands, new food and drink offerings and hospitality areas as well as in the region of 30,000 sq ft of flexible workspace in the new East Stand. The total capacity would increase to approximately 20,000. Financial results£ | 2022 | 2021 | Turnover | 4.8m | 2.1m | Wages | Unknown | Unknown | Player additions | 368k | 293k | Creditors (<1 year) | 2.7m | 1.8m | Operating loss | 4.9m | 2.6m | 2nd WrexhamOwner: The R.R McReynolds Company Investments before or during 2021/22Immediately after acquiring the club in February 2021, Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney invested £2m through a share purchase. They also loaned the club £3.7m during the season. These loans are accruing interest at 3% over the Bank of England base rate, so currently 7.25%. After the season concluded, the owners acquired more shares for £1.2m. Infrastructure improvementsThe £3.7m loan from the owners primarily funded the purchase of the freehold for the Racecourse Ground. This, together with some improvements to the stadium, resulted in a total infrastructure spend for the year of £4.4m. In November 2022, Wrexham Council approved plans to replace the old Kop stand at the Racecourse Ground. The development will raise the capacity of the stadium to 15,500. Financial resultsNote #1: Income from the Welcome to Wrexham documentary will be reflected in next year’s statement. Note #2: The figure given for wages is described as "football costs" in Wrexham's press statement. It is unclear if this includes admin staff, so it might not be possible to make an apples to apples comparison with other clubs here. £ | 2022 | 2021 | Turnover | 6m | 1.5m | --> Matchday | 2.7m | --> Retail | 1.3m | --> Sponsorships | 1.1m | Wages | 3.9m | 1.3m | Player additions | 1.2m | 0 | Creditors (<1 year) | 4m | 380k | Operating loss | 2.9m | 1.2m | 5th Notts CountyOwner: Alexander & Christoffer Reedtz Investments before or during 2021/22The club borrowed £2m from the owners during the season, taking the total debt to £11.9m. Financial results£ | 2022 | 2021 | Turnover | Unknown | Unknown | Wages | Unknown | Unknown | Player additions | 227k | 3,606 | Creditors (<1 year) | 13.7m | 11.3m | Operating loss | 1.7m | 2.2m | 6th Grimsby TownOwner: 1878 Partners Investments before or during 2021/22The owners loaned the club £1.5m interest-free during the season, mainly to pay off the previous owner's loans. Infrastructure improvementsThe club made several long overdue investments over the season, which included " pitch improvements (including an enhanced sprinkler system at Blundell Park) and new gym equipment and building at the training ground. A new glass barrier was installed in the Upper Youngs stand to improve the supporters' views." The owners are planning to develop a new £6m training facility in the coming years. Financial results£ | 2022 | 2021 | Turnover | 4.4m | 3.5m | --> Matchday | 1.5m | --> Commercial | 1.3m | --> Broadcasting | 725k | Wages | 3.1m | 2.8m | Player additions | 0 | 0 | Creditors (<1 year) | 865k | 1.2m | Operating loss | 931k | 196k (profit) | Note: Pay attention to the difference between the Mariners' broadcasting revenue and Chesterfield's below. This shows the benefit of parachute payments Town enjoyed in their first (and only) season back in the National League. 7th ChesterfieldOwner: Chesterfield FC Community Trust Investments before or during 2021/22After the season had concluded, £10.8m of loans were exchanged for £5m of shares. Remaining amounts owed to the Trust total just over £1m. Infrastructure improvementsChesterfield FC are planning to build a new training facility. In July 2022, they tabled a bid for some land "across town" and hope to move forward "pretty quickly". Financial results£ | 2022 | 2021 | Turnover | 3.9m | 2m | --> Matchday | 2m | --> Commercial | 1.3m | --> Broadcasting | 258k | Wages | 3.4m | 2.1m | Player additions | 483k | 10k | Creditors (<1 year) | 2.7m | 12.6m | Operating loss | 2.4m | 413k |
|
|
|
|
|
TwoLeftFeet |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,056
Posts Per Day: 0.18
Reputation: 85.92%
Rep Score: +4 / 0
Location: Cleethorpes
Approval: +2,101
Gold Stars: 19
|
Interesting that just shows how key it was us getting out the National so quickly, even more so if the TV deals are getting improved over next couple of seasons for EFL teams.. expensive hobby running a football club..
|
|
Logged |
Online |
|
|
|
HertsGTFC |
|
Posts: 14,110
Posts Per Day: 4.26
Reputation: 75.4%
Rep Score: +29 / -10
Location: Stevenage
Approval: +22,985
Gold Stars: 228
|
Winning promotion with no fees on players and 3rd in the wages table is a decent achievement I reckon.
|
| "Crombie you would have got to that if you weren't such a fat ba%$@rd" - George Kerr, inspiration from the dug out 70s style |
|
|
|
|
ginnywings |
|
Recovering Alcoholic
Posts: 28,149
Posts Per Day: 5.02
Reputation: 73.79%
Rep Score: +88 / -32
Approval: +56,151
Gold Stars: 548
|
Winning promotion with no fees on players and 3rd in the wages table is a decent achievement I reckon.
Reflects well on the manager.
|
|
|
|
|
TheRealJohnLewis |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,250
Posts Per Day: 0.30
Reputation: 67.36%
Rep Score: +13 / -8
Approval: +2,308
Gold Stars: 39
|
Surely there were more bigger spenders in the league than us, Notts County?
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
HertsGTFC |
|
Posts: 14,110
Posts Per Day: 4.26
Reputation: 75.4%
Rep Score: +29 / -10
Location: Stevenage
Approval: +22,985
Gold Stars: 228
|
Reflects well on the manager.
100%
|
| "Crombie you would have got to that if you weren't such a fat ba%$@rd" - George Kerr, inspiration from the dug out 70s style |
|
|
|
|
Mappers |
|
Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,382
Posts Per Day: 5.44
Reputation: 75.95%
Rep Score: +8 / -3
Approval: +4,410
Gold Stars: 119
|
Surely there were more bigger spenders in the league than us, Notts County?
Yeah notts county for sure and potentially Solihull who as he says havent released their accounts yet . Cant imagine anyone else
|
|
Logged |
Online |
|
|
|
Limerick Mariner |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,358
Posts Per Day: 0.56
Reputation: 78.12%
Rep Score: +10 / -3
Location: Melton Mowbray
Approval: +5,724
Gold Stars: 137
|
What stands out to me there is that Chesterfield had £500k more matchday revenue than us, which shows the limitation of Blundell Park compared to a new stadium. Our matchday revenue can hardly grow at all, home seats are nearly all sold whether filled or not, and as shown on the Away Attendances thread, we have one of the lowest number of visiting fans in the league and our hospitality offer at BP is very limited and also sold out for most League games.
|
|
|
|
|
LN8Mariner |
|
Beer Drinker
Posts: 170
Posts Per Day: 0.14
Reputation: 81.78%
Rep Score: +1 / 0
Approval: +329
Gold Stars: 9
|
This is really interesting to read and to me identifies some well worn out threads! A quick look at FFP and the SCMP [url]https://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php[/url] show that with £3.1m wages “extra income” needs to do a lot of heavy lifting. If we take into account transfer income [fave thread 3 ] then this will help bring the wages into 55% or less as required. Whilst the wages for SCMP only include player wages it highlights why we may not be able to break the bank for paying players’ wages [fave thread 2]. Taking these into account, a quick back of the envelope calculation shows that 7500 x 23 games needs an average of ~£415 per season to cover the £3.1m so unless we can move or increase capacity [fave thread 1a and 1b] then we need a lot of commercial interest or equity release (loans, benign or otherwise, cannot be included as income). An extra £1 per match per seat increases income by net gross (edit!) £175000 give or take so that’s one player on £3k per week and a 5% increase in seat prices… that’ll go down well! So who’d sponsor the ground in its current state? I know they’re sponsoring the club in doing so but would anybody really want their name associated with a dilapidated Main Stand leaking water and money? I would also hazard a guess that this is why money is being “diverted” elsewhere currently where it does not come under the scrutiny of SCMP, e.g. training, pitch, ground improvements?
|
|
|
|
|
HertsGTFC |
|
Posts: 14,110
Posts Per Day: 4.26
Reputation: 75.4%
Rep Score: +29 / -10
Location: Stevenage
Approval: +22,985
Gold Stars: 228
|
This is really interesting to read and to me identifies some well worn out threads! A quick look at FFP and the SCMP [url]https://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php[/url] show that with £3.1m wages “extra income” needs to do a lot of heavy lifting. If we take into account transfer income [fave thread 3 ] then this will help bring the wages into 55% or less as required. Whilst the wages for SCMP only include player wages it highlights why we may not be able to break the bank for paying players’ wages [fave thread 2]. Taking these into account, a quick back of the envelope calculation shows that 7500 x 23 games needs an average of ~£415 per season to cover the £3.1m so unless we can move or increase capacity [fave thread 1a and 1b] then we need a lot of commercial interest or equity release (loans, benign or otherwise, cannot be included as income). An extra £1 per match per seat increases income by net £175000 give or take so that’s one player on £3k per week and a 5% increase in seat prices… that’ll go down well! So who’d sponsor the ground in its current state? I know they’re sponsoring the club in doing so but would anybody really want their name associated with a dilapidated Main Stand leaking water and money? I would also hazard a guess that this is why money is being “diverted” elsewhere currently where it does not come under the scrutiny of SCMP, e.g. training, pitch, ground improvements?
You’ve managed to steer some good top line analysis in the direction of moving to a new ground, not an incorrect observation as we all know. The complete picture would be to include the capex required and the ROI on a move at this current time.
|
| "Crombie you would have got to that if you weren't such a fat ba%$@rd" - George Kerr, inspiration from the dug out 70s style |
|
|
|
|
MaccasBoots |
|
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 468
Posts Per Day: 0.28
Approval: +695
Gold Stars: 23
|
Very interesting that Hollywood's loan to Wrexham is accruing interest at 3% over BofE base rate - maybe they aren't as generous as Wrexham fans seem to think?
|
|
|
|
|
MarinerDevil |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,039
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +2,779
Gold Stars: 80
|
This is really interesting to read and to me identifies some well worn out threads! A quick look at FFP and the SCMP [url]https://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php[/url] show that with £3.1m wages “extra income” needs to do a lot of heavy lifting. If we take into account transfer income [fave thread 3 ] then this will help bring the wages into 55% or less as required. Whilst the wages for SCMP only include player wages it highlights why we may not be able to break the bank for paying players’ wages [fave thread 2]. Taking these into account, a quick back of the envelope calculation shows that 7500 x 23 games needs an average of ~£415 per season to cover the £3.1m so unless we can move or increase capacity [fave thread 1a and 1b] then we need a lot of commercial interest or equity release (loans, benign or otherwise, cannot be included as income). An extra £1 per match per seat increases income by net gross (edit!) £175000 give or take so that’s one player on £3k per week and a 5% increase in seat prices… that’ll go down well! So who’d sponsor the ground in its current state? I know they’re sponsoring the club in doing so but would anybody really want their name associated with a dilapidated Main Stand leaking water and money? I would also hazard a guess that this is why money is being “diverted” elsewhere currently where it does not come under the scrutiny of SCMP, e.g. training, pitch, ground improvements?
Just to note, Town's and Chesterfield's wage totals include social security and pension contributions, but I'm not sure if they're included in the SCMP calculation (if they were in League 2). But to address your point, with a £4.4m turnover, our maximum playing budget under SCMP is ~£2.3m. We're probably already near that limit looking at our total wage bill. The £1m extra "football fortune" from the cup run will help a bit next season, but it shows how much we need to grow the commercial side of the business if we're going to compete at the top of this league or the one above... Or get a new stadium of course.
|
|
|
|
|
GollyGTFC |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,969
Posts Per Day: 0.69
Reputation: 67.2%
Rep Score: +19 / -11
Approval: +6,048
Gold Stars: 358
|
Very interesting that Hollywood's loan to Wrexham is accruing interest at 3% over BofE base rate - maybe they aren't as generous as Wrexham fans seem to think?
Remember historic losses can be used to offset future profits for Corporation Tax purposes. There’s a huge difference between having interest charged against a loan on the accounts and the lender(s) actually receiving the interest money if/when the debt is settled. It might seem quite optimistic to believe Wrexham could be profitable under the current ownership model, but you never know. Inflating losses now would help Corporation Tax avoidance if that ever happened.
|
|
|
|
|
GollyGTFC |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,969
Posts Per Day: 0.69
Reputation: 67.2%
Rep Score: +19 / -11
Approval: +6,048
Gold Stars: 358
|
Just to note, Town's and Chesterfield's wage totals include social security and pension contributions, but I'm not sure if they're included in the SCMP calculation (if they were in League 2).
But to address your point, with a £4.4m turnover, our maximum playing budget under SCMP is ~£2.3m. We're probably already near that limit looking at our total wage bill. The £1m extra "football fortune" from the cup run will help a bit next season, but it shows how much we need to grow the commercial side of the business if we're going to compete at the top of this league or the one above... Or get a new stadium of course.
FFP & SCMP is completely irrelevant because of the broad definition of turnover that the EFL use. It’s a complete waste of time. Owner donations and share issues are included. So owners can bankroll their club to whatever level they choose as long as it’s a share purchase or a donation and not a loan. There’s no incentive to do the same in the NL (turn debt into shares) as there’s no FFP which is why you get eye watering losses. When these clubs reach the EFL the owner has an incentive to turn debt into shares as it helps the FFP calculation and allows free spending.
|
|
|
|
|
GollyGTFC |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,969
Posts Per Day: 0.69
Reputation: 67.2%
Rep Score: +19 / -11
Approval: +6,048
Gold Stars: 358
|
FFP & SCMP is completely irrelevant because of the broad definition of turnover that the EFL use. It’s a complete waste of time. Owner donations and share issues are included. So owners can bankroll their club to whatever level they choose as long as it’s a share purchase or a donation and not a loan.
There’s no incentive to do the same in the NL (turn debt into shares) as there’s no FFP which is why you get eye watering losses. When these clubs reach the EFL the owner has an incentive to turn debt into shares as it helps the FFP calculation and allows free spending.
Just read the original post. The Stockport owner did this when they became members of the EFL in June 2022.
|
|
|
|
|
gtfc_chris |
|
Snakebite drinker
Posts: 404
Posts Per Day: 0.48
Reputation: 90.32%
Rep Score: +10 / 0
Location: Laceby
Approval: +1,508
Gold Stars: 115
|
Winning promotion with no fees on players and 3rd in the wages table is a decent achievement I reckon.
That's third of the list of 3 clubs who provided a breakdown of their accounts. If I understand the OP right (please correct me if I'm wrong), the other teams haven't declared what and where their money was spent, so if I'm right that could mean we were lower down the list in terms of wages paid.
|
|
|
|
|
OddShapedBalls |
|
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 681
Posts Per Day: 1.02
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +1,194
Gold Stars: 40
|
To be fair to Wrexham, for all their wild spunking of cash on Mullin and anyone else they could find, they didn't have too much of a gap in wages to us compared to what I imagined.
Big takeaway from that though is a club happy to lose £5 million.......winning the lottery might not be enough for me to invest in town after all lol
|
|
|
|
|
grimps |
|
balderdashWhiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,459
Posts Per Day: 0.79
Reputation: 57.6%
Rep Score: +21 / -19
Approval: +5,136
Gold Stars: 46
|
I thought we’d be miles behind some of the other teams in wages. Maybe a lot of our players still had their league contracts on higher wages ?
|
|
|
|
|
MarinerDevil |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,039
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +2,779
Gold Stars: 80
|
FFP & SCMP is completely irrelevant because of the broad definition of turnover that the EFL use. It’s a complete waste of time. Owner donations and share issues are included. So owners can bankroll their club to whatever level they choose as long as it’s a share purchase or a donation and not a loan.
There’s no incentive to do the same in the NL (turn debt into shares) as there’s no FFP which is why you get eye watering losses. When these clubs reach the EFL the owner has an incentive to turn debt into shares as it helps the FFP calculation and allows free spending.
That's interesting, I suppose it's still relevant for us as our owners aren't going to fund the club through share issues (based on what they did last season). Stockwood also mentioned SCMP in his last interview which suggests we're constrained by it somewhat.
|
|
|
|
|
MarinerDevil |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,039
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +2,779
Gold Stars: 80
|
That's third of the list of 3 clubs who provided a breakdown of their accounts. If I understand the OP right (please correct me if I'm wrong), the other teams haven't declared what and where their money was spent, so if I'm right that could mean we were lower down the list in terms of wages paid.
Correct. Most clubs didn't provide a figure for wages, but we can still compare ours to Chesterfield's.
|
|
|
|
|
MarinerDevil |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,039
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 81.19%
Rep Score: +5 / -1
Approval: +2,779
Gold Stars: 80
|
I thought we’d be miles behind some of the other teams in wages. Maybe a lot of our players still had their league contracts on higher wages ?
Bear in mind that the Wrexham wage figure might not be comparable to ours and Chesterfield's, which I explained in a note in the OP: Wrexham only reported their "football costs", which sounds to me like playing staff wages only, whereas our figure is for all employees (as well as social security and pension contributions). There's a good chance that Wrexham's total wage bill is higher than £3.9m.
|
|
|
|
|