Everton FC - Finances

[deipnosophist]

Compensation to Wigan as well for Martinez and his staff?

hmmm... So far we have Kone, McCarthy, Robles and McGeady =23mio. Looking for 31mio to match accounts. Maybe we paid Wigan 8 mio as per your post and expensed the whole 8mio via amortisation (hence the jump in amortisation yr to yr from 10mio to 18mio). Seems a bit far fetched though...

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I guess that's conceivable. So far we have Kone, McCarthy, Robles and McGeady =23mio. Looking for 31mio to match accounts. Maybe we paid Wigan 8 mio as per your post and expensed the whole 8mio via amortisation (hence the jump in amortisation yr to yr from 10mio to 18mio). Seems a bit far fetched though...

Seem to remember it was something like £2/3m for Martinez's compensation and a further £1m for all his staff Deipno.

 

[deipnosophist]

Seem to remember it was something like £2/3m for Martinez's compensation and a further £1m for all his staff Deipno.

cheers...was not aware of that. Wigan got a fair bit of cash from Everton then...not that it has helped them much!

 

[The Esk]

I guess that's conceivable. So far we have Kone, McCarthy, Robles and McGeady =23mio. Looking for 31mio to match accounts. Maybe we paid Wigan 8 mio as per your post and expensed the whole 8mio via amortisation (hence the jump in amortisation yr to yr from 10mio to 18mio). Seems a bit far fetched though...

No. Compensation paid for managers/coaching staff is not included in intangibles it is a direct employment cost to the P&L.

The only other explanation for the difference between the cash amount of purchase of intangibles (which was £24.5 m) and the £31 million added in the balance sheet is the adjustment of amortised values when player contracts are extended. I would have to check with an accountant first though to see if that was correct.

 

[deipnosophist]

No. Compensation paid for managers/coaching staff is not included in intangibles it is a direct employment cost to the P&L.

The only other explanation for the difference between the cash amount of purchase of intangibles (which was £24.5 m) and the £31 million added in the balance sheet is the adjustment of amortised values when player contracts are extended. I would have to check with an accountant first though to see if that was correct.

...good consideration...I recall we extended Hibbo's contract

 

[The Esk]

Am I to deduce from this that Fellaini, Anichebe and Jelavich had residual (amortised) book value of 9.8 mio (since 38mio was the gross (cash) sales number, if I recall)

I do not recognise the £38 m figure you mention?

Cash proceeds from disposal of intangible assets was £19.4 m. The player trading profit was booked in at £28.2 m.

 

[deipnosophist]

I do not recognise the £38 m figure you mention?

Cash proceeds from disposal of intangible assets was £19.4 m. The player trading profit was booked in at £28.2 m.

I thought Fellaini (27mio)+Jelavich(5mio)+Anichebe(6mio) sales equated to 38mio.
And there was a big jump in debtors 9.8mio to 31mio...is the difference between headline receipt(38mio) and cash proceeds in there somewhere ?(ie were United, Hull and WBA trade debtors/still owe us at balance date?)

 

[deipnosophist]

No. Compensation paid for managers/coaching staff is not included in intangibles it is a direct employment cost to the P&L.

The only other explanation for the difference between the cash amount of purchase of intangibles (which was £24.5 m) and the £31 million added in the balance sheet is the adjustment of amortised values when player contracts are extended. I would have to check with an accountant first though to see if that was correct.

where would the loan fees for Lukaku, Barry and deulofeu be ledgered?

 

[The Esk]

I thought Fellaini (27mio)+Jelavich(5mio)+Anichebe(6mio) sales equated to 38mio.
And there was a big jump in debtors 9.8mio to 31mio...is the difference between headline receipt(38mio) and cash proceeds in there somewhere ?(ie were United, Hull and WBA trade debtors/still owe us at balance date?)

Ah OK, I have Bidwell £1m, Amichebe £6m, Fellaini £27.5m and Jelavich £6m , totalling £ 40.5 m.

Yes change in debtors plus cash proceeds equals player disposals approximately,

 

[The Esk]

where would the loan fees for Lukaku, Barry and deulofeu be ledgered?

I'd assume that loan fees are just part of the employment costs and appear in the P&L.
Difficult to make a case that a loan player is an asset in the same way that an owned player is.

 

[deipnosophist]

I'd assume that loan fees are just part of the employment costs and appear in the P&L.
Difficult to make a case that a loan player is an asset in the same way that an owned player is.

I'd agree. But staff costs increased 6 mio yr on yr. If the compensation to Wigan (4 mio according to @Dithering Dougie ) and loan fees (3-4 mio?) went into staff costs, then recurring wages went down...unlikely.

 

[The Esk]

I'd agree. But staff costs increased 6 mio yr on yr. If the compensation to Wigan (4 mio according to @Dithering Dougie ) and loan fees (3-4 mio?) went into staff costs, then recurring wages went down...unlikely.

Compensation to Wigan was reported at £1.5 million if I recall correctly.

 

[evo1878]

No. Compensation paid for managers/coaching staff is not included in intangibles it is a direct employment cost to the P&L.

The only other explanation for the difference between the cash amount of purchase of intangibles (which was £24.5 m) and the £31 million added in the balance sheet is the adjustment of amortised values when player contracts are extended. I would have to check with an accountant first though to see if that was correct.

That is a possible explanation. Could it possibly be a 'revaluation' of existing assets e.g player(s) who have come through the academy / U21s into the first team now with a contract / value that is now considered amortisable? Someone like john stones for example.

 

[terraloon]

I'd agree. But staff costs increased 6 mio yr on yr. If the compensation to Wigan (4 mio according to @Dithering Dougie ) and loan fees (3-4 mio?) went into staff costs, then recurring wages went down...unlikely.

Probably a slight of hand in that when a player is sent out on loan the home club of the player continues to pay their wages and will in turn invoice the club where the player is on loan
So say for the likes of RL his wages will actually have been paid by Chelsea and any fee charged by them to Everton is probably shown in operating costs which from memory went up by quite a large amount
Ok when it comes to FFP submissions adjustments are made but we don't get shown these forms

 

[deipnosophist]

That is a possible explanation. Could it possibly be a 'revaluation' of existing assets e.g player(s) who have come through the academy / U21s into the first team now with a contract / value that is now considered amortisable? Someone like john stones for example.

But would that not create a 'profit' outcome...which is then amortised away. Why bother?