The Everton Board Thread 2015/16 [ Not takeover related ]

[TheFinnFan]

YERSSS

 

[The Esk]

Has @the esk been on yet to 'dumb-ify' our latest accounts for me yet ?

I want to know if we are either going bankrupt or signing messi in the summer, with Ronaldo joining in January ?
Whats the future hold esk ?

Pretty much a "steady as you are" set of accounts to be honest mate, nothing at all to get excited about really. More than anything else they demonstrate that without investment we can not develop the club, facilities or heavily invest in playing staff. In the absence of a takeover or fresh investment, we will remain indebted until the next huge increase in broadcasting revenues which start in season 2016/17.

The club is profitable at the operating level which should be welcomed but the commercial and sponsorship revenues are extremely poor compared to our competitors at the top end of the Premiership. Because of that we will continue to fall behind those clubs financially and allow the gap between ourselves and the likes of Stoke and Southampton to narrow further.

Whereas even 5 years ago we could point at a club that was progressively sinking, we at least are on an even keel now - only down to the increase in broadcasting revenues, nothing else. We need to be taken over to move forward regardless of our ability to out-perform (in relation to funds) on the pitch - it's as simple as that.

 

[Chang Elephant]

Why do we need photos of a very young woman on the board thread???????????

Over the age of consent lad, no need for the innuendo

 

[Pacman]

Spurs, West Ham and liverpool expanding stadiums, clubs like West ham, Southampton and Palace catching us up in the table.

My belief is if the board haven't sold up within the next 2-3 seasons we'll fall into a mid table club scraping for 11th/-14th every season.

 

[USABlue]

Spurs, West Ham and liverpool expanding stadiums, clubs like West ham, Southampton and Palace catching us up in the table.

My belief is if the board haven't sold up within the next 2-3 seasons we'll fall into a mid table club scraping for 11th/-14th every season.

I mean it'd be nice if we got a free stadium too

 

[davek]

Elstone: "We’ve strengthened our marketing, commercial and operations teams."

Err....ok then.

Here's the three new commercial team members ready to take the club forward....

 

[Del-boy]

We almost had that option with the Kings dock, with us only needing to provide £30 million if reports are correct. That's nothing for a new stadium.

But one guys ego got in the way...

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Here's the three new commercial team members ready to take the club forward....

Sure? I thought I saw these three hanging around t'other day

 

[davek]

Sure? I thought I saw these three hanging around t'other day

Here they are with their clothes on...

 

[MACCA75]

Spurs, West Ham and liverpool expanding stadiums, clubs like West ham, Southampton and Palace catching us up in the table.

My belief is if the board haven't sold up within the next 2-3 seasons we'll fall into a mid table club scraping for 11th/-14th every season.

Already happened that.

 

[blueblue]

Pretty much a "steady as you are" set of accounts to be honest mate, nothing at all to get excited about really. More than anything else they demonstrate that without investment we can not develop the club, facilities or heavily invest in playing staff. In the absence of a takeover or fresh investment, we will remain indebted until the next huge increase in broadcasting revenues which start in season 2016/17.

The club is profitable at the operating level which should be welcomed but the commercial and sponsorship revenues are extremely poor compared to our competitors at the top end of the Premiership. Because of that we will continue to fall behind those clubs financially and allow the gap between ourselves and the likes of Stoke and Southampton to narrow further.

Whereas even 5 years ago we could point at a club that was progressively sinking, we at least are on an even keel now - only down to the increase in broadcasting revenues, nothing else. We need to be taken over to move forward regardless of our ability to out-perform (in relation to funds) on the pitch - it's as simple as that.

Esk.
I am sure the board and Bill Kenwright have probably accepted that the scenario you painted above is reality. I think it is this acceptance that in part at least is the reason for what seems like a genuine attempt to attract new owners or investors.

I think that the club is at a crucial stage just now. There will be the almost unbelieveable amounts of money coming from television, but that money will be there for all premiership clubs so that levels the playing field.
If we stay at Goodison we will continue to fall behind other clubs with better facilities and in time we could be passed out by lesser clubs...that hasn't happened yet in spite of what some believe, but the day will come.

I do believe however that when our new owners do arrive that many on here will be disappointed when they see that money is not being thrown around like we have seen at Chelsea and City. I think our new owners will be very conscious of a return on capital invested and I do not see any major changes happening apart from any extra revenue generated by a new stadium...and you have previously indicated that this will not amount to large sums of moey...relatively speaking.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Esk.
I am sure the board and Bill Kenwright have probably accepted that the scenario you painted above is reality. I think it is this acceptance that in part at least is the reason for what seems like a genuine attempt to attract new owners or investors.

I think that the club is at a crucial stage just now. There will be the almost unbelieveable amounts of money coming from television, but that money will be there for all premiership clubs so that levels the playing field.
If we stay at Goodison we will continue to fall behind other clubs with better facilities and in time we could be passed out by lesser clubs...that hasn't happened yet in spite of what some believe, but the day will come.

I do believe however that when our new owners do arrive that many on here will be disappointed when they see that money is not being thrown around like we have seen at Chelsea and City. I think our new owners will be very conscious of a return on capital invested and I do not see any major changes happening apart from any extra revenue generated by a new stadium...and you have previously indicated that this will not amount to large sums of moey...relatively speaking.

Sadly some posters will never be happy with investors they want benefactors.

Until we get someone who's prepared to be a benevolent patron there'll always be a disenfranchised section of our support.

 

[The Esk]

Esk.
I am sure the board and Bill Kenwright have probably accepted that the scenario you painted above is reality. I think it is this acceptance that in part at least is the reason for what seems like a genuine attempt to attract new owners or investors.

I think that the club is at a crucial stage just now. There will be the almost unbelieveable amounts of money coming from television, but that money will be there for all premiership clubs so that levels the playing field.
If we stay at Goodison we will continue to fall behind other clubs with better facilities and in time we could be passed out by lesser clubs...that hasn't happened yet in spite of what some believe, but the day will come.

I do believe however that when our new owners do arrive that many on here will be disappointed when they see that money is not being thrown around like we have seen at Chelsea and City. I think our new owners will be very conscious of a return on capital invested and I do not see any major changes happening apart from any extra revenue generated by a new stadium...and you have previously indicated that this will not amount to large sums of moey...relatively speaking.

Good post mate.

Couple of points - a move to a 50000 seat stadium say in 3 years time would increase revenues by approximately £19 million a season based on assumptions I have set out before.

An improvement in commercial and sponsorship performance of 100% in 3 years would add £25 million of revenue.

The wiping of interest costs and reduced operating expenses in a new stadium would add £5 million a year.

Broadcasting revenues in 3 years would be 60 % higher, so let's say £50 million in added revenues.

So there's £100 million a year in additional revenues - investment required probably something in the order of £450 - 500 million to acquire the club and build a new stadium.

That's do-able with the right investors, support from the City Council and a sensible new stadium development.

There's a second model which is the redevelopment of Goodison which would require less capital, and would involve significant disruption over probably 3 seasons. Revenues from a redeveloped Goodison would be lower than a well furnished new stadium but not significantly so. This of course would also need City Council support which might be more problematic.

Interesting times ahead on the assumption that there is a change of ownership and the new owners have sufficiently deep pockets without having to resort to debt or unnecessary leverage to satisfy investor demands for immediate returns.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Good post mate.

Couple of points - a move to a 50000 seat stadium say in 3 years time would increase revenues by approximately £19 million a season based on assumptions I have set out before.

An improvement in commercial and sponsorship performance of 100% in 3 years would add £25 million of revenue.

The wiping of interest costs and reduced operating expenses in a new stadium would add £5 million a year.

Broadcasting revenues in 3 years would be 60 % higher, so let's say £50 million in added revenues.

So there's £100 million a year in additional revenues - investment required probably something in the order of £450 - 500 million to acquire the club and build a new stadium.

That's do-able with the right investors, support from the City Council and a sensible new stadium development.

There's a second model which is the redevelopment of Goodison which would require less capital, and would involve significant disruption over probably 3 seasons. Revenues from a redeveloped Goodison would be lower than a well furnished new stadium but not significantly so. This of course would also need City Council support which might be more problematic.

Interesting times ahead on the assumption that there is a change of ownership and the new owners have sufficiently deep pockets without having to resort to debt or unnecessary leverage to satisfy investor demands for immediate returns.

@the esk Probably being incredibly stupid here, but a looked at the figures and I can only understand your 19mil assumption if you are making a non like for like comparison and have included hospitality.

If you base the new gate receipts on 35mil on a like for like basis, using the same occupancy rate of 97.05% in a 50000 seater stadium and only use the guaranteed matches from the 19 Premier League matches, the cost of a ticket on a like for like basis where hospitality is stripped out would be £34,032108* divided by (19x48527) = £36.88 net per seat, or an average ticket price of £45.60p to Joe Public.
(* calculated as follows ((19 x 38406 x £20.60)+19,000,000). Question is what is the split on gate receipts and hospitality within the 19 million, or what seat price have you based it on?

I note your last paragraph, but do you think it possible that the new owners would 450-500mil in with no immediate return?
Is it not more realistic to factor in a return on the money they provide for the stadium building, the corollary of which is you lose approx. 5 mil in interest and operating costs but assume a rate of 7% on say £200mil (near as matters in the early years if long tem debt) so 14mil in interest is added, 9mil heavier on expenses. Impact on FFP?

Would there not be extra expenses in relation to higher business rates, stewarding etc in a new ground or is this contra'd against the savings so the 5 mil is net?

I am looking at this from a conservative point of view, and I understand that the likelihood of away cup draws and being knocked out straight away is unlikely but it is possible. As for Europe - well we'll see.

Bear in mind, I am using the information to hand from our accounts so feel free to shoot me down, but 19mil on a like for like basis is problematic to say the least (80% average hike in prices).

 

[The Esk]

@the esk Probably being incredibly stupid here, but a looked at the figures and I can only understand your 19mil assumption if you are making a non like for like comparison and have included hospitality.

If you base the new gate receipts on 35mil on a like for like basis, using the same occupancy rate of 97.05% in a 50000 seater stadium and only use the guaranteed matches from the 19 Premier League matches, the cost of a ticket on a like for like basis where hospitality is stripped out would be £34,032108* divided by (19x48527) = £36.88 net per seat, or an average ticket price of £45.60p to Joe Public.
(* calculated as follows ((19 x 38406 x £20.60)+19,000,000). Question is what is the split on gate receipts and hospitality within the 19 million, or what seat price have you based it on?

I note your last paragraph, but do you think it possible that the new owners would 450-500mil in with no immediate return?
Is it not more realistic to factor in a return on the money they provide for the stadium building, the corollary of which is you lose approx. 5 mil in interest and operating costs but assume a rate of 7% on say £200mil (near as matters in the early years if long tem debt) so 14mil in interest is added, 9mil heavier on expenses. Impact on FFP?

Would there not be extra expenses in relation to higher business rates, stewarding etc in a new ground or is this contra'd against the savings so the 5 mil is net?

I am looking at this from a conservative point of view, and I understand that the likelihood of away cup draws and being knocked out straight away is unlikely but it is possible. As for Europe - well we'll see.

Bear in mind, I am using the information to hand from our accounts so feel free to shoot me down, but 19mil on a like for like basis is problematic to say the least (80% average hike in prices).

Appreciate your willingness to test my figures!

There's several factors in my revenue up lift figures.

Yes there's an increase in ticket prices across the board but nearer to 20% for ordinary match goers.

The key is yield management. You have to look at a football stadium like a airline looks at a plane. How many ways can you offer premium seating to suit different pockets and different customer types? Liverpool's stadium development is built on a complex model of different premium pricing and there's no reason why Everton cannot do something similar in concept (albeit with different pricing points). The net effect is a huge uplift in overall yield per seat.

Also for ease of explanation I have added back into revenues some cost savings associated with a new stadium. On a per seat basis a 50,000 seat new stadium is far cheaper to run than a 40,000 old stadium. Obviously for accounting purposes this would be presented differently but the net effect would be the same.

I have also assumed that part of any deal would be minimal contributions to business rates for a considerable period. If you look at WHP that is currently a piece of land with a negative yield as far as the council is concerned so there scope for negotiation on that and many other areas.

Re immediate return for investors on stadium build or development it should be noted that Fenway are providing Liverpool with £115 million loan with no interest costs.

Whoever acquires Everton will have their own figures, all I am demonstrating is what is possible with the correct strategies and management team alongside the resources required to achieve these goals.

We need a vision and ambition off field to compete with all the previously mentioned clubs who are well into the process of achieving what for us still remain words on a football forum, let alone a strategy in a boardroom