Bluesnapper
Player Valuation: £8m
I wasnt asked to make a point.
I am asking you what tangible assets are left?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
- Status
I wasnt asked to make a point.
I am asking you what tangible assets are left?
Steve Wigan
Player Valuation: £35m
Joey...I've always thought that the only thing that matters is the value(call it 'quality' ) of the team that goes on the pitch. There is not a league table that matters for 'net spend' Only the usual teams...City, United, perhaps Arsenal and Chelsea will have large net spends this window, apart from those spending their Vibrac style borrowings or a proportion of their tv money. Are there many of the players who have moved for 10-15 million would you have genuinely wanted at Everton ?
The Esk
Player Valuation: £70m
All good questions mate.
I’ll answer your questions and then offer an alternative explanation:
1.Yes
2.Not necessarily. Investment into the club by shareholders can improve the balance sheet by paying down debt, providing capital for expansion – stadium and playing squad, and providing working capital to create in-house commercial activities not outsourced
3.They would be classed as tangible assets on the balance sheet. Players are classed as intangible assets, but I wouldn’t worry about the distinction tbh.
I’ll try and explain as easily as I can….
Income: The club generates income from 5 principal sources: Broadcasting revenues, gate receipts, commercial activities, sponsorship, and player trading.
In order to maximise the income potential of the club, it requires capital (or debt) to build or acquire the assets that will generate the income.
So capital is required for essentially 3 areas: stadium, commercial activities and the playing squad. If there’s insufficient capital to invest in any of the above the club’s ability to generate income is reduced.
If there’s significant capital invested in the stadium, commercial activities and the squad then each in turn will generate more income (bigger stadium, corporate clients, shirt deals, sponsorship etc, and of course higher broadcasting revenues from greater success on the pitch following investment in the squad).
This excess income will generate profits which can either be paid to the owners (shareholders) as dividends (very rare in football clubs) or re-invested back into the club.
In the case of Everton we have insufficient capital to build the assets to generate sufficient income to make a profit to reinvest. Thus each year we become financially less competitive.
The Esk
Player Valuation: £70m
Here's the article about the urgency in seeking new investment:
There’s almost no argument that new investment is not required – investment in the team, the stadium and commercial operations. Few have examined the timing of this investment and the consequences of delay.
The time for new investment is now. The club cannot afford to wait any longer.
The new broadcasting deal which starts in season 2016-17 widens the gap between the successful clubs and the less successful.
Last year the club with the 7th highest broadcasting revenue (Everton) received £12.5 million less than the club receiving the most (Liverpool). In 2016-17 that gap will be £20.9 million. The gap between 1st and 10th in order of broadcasting revenue grows from £22 million to £35 million.
Tie that in with the difference in gate receipts and commercial income between Everton and our peers and you can clearly see that the income gap will widen further.
Not only that, but all our peers have a balance sheet which gives them the opportunity to spend heavily in the transfer window should they wish to do so.
The gap between the Premiership “haves” and “have nots” will continue to grow more quickly as the broadcasting deal revenues flow into the Premiership.
Paradoxically, the increase in revenues across the Premiership makes Everton more vulnerable on the pitch, and importantly for the Board (who own 70%) of the club, makes the equity value of the club more vulnerable also. Why? Because as the income and balance sheet gaps between Everton and our peers grow, the amount of investment required to bridge the gap increases, thereby reducing the current value of the equity.
Similarly if the value of the equity falls then the cost to existing shareholders of future capital raisings through issuing new shares increases.
Inactivity now threatens the value of the Board members individual holdings.
Control (or loss of) is often a reason quoted for the Board not to issue new equity in return for new investment. The Board can issue more than 12,500 shares without subscribing for shares themselves before losing control.
If the club is worth £140 million, then the shares are worth £4,000 each – that being the case the club can raise £50 million without subscribing for new shares, nor losing control. If the figure of £200 million is used, then over £70 million can be raised.
The point though is that to do this it must be done now. Failure to re-capitalise the business now will significantly reduce the Board’s ability to do so in the future, and will significantly reduce the value of their holdings.
£50 or £70 million will not solve Everton’s capital requirements, but it would allow investment in our key assets, the playing squad.
I’ll talk further next time about the funding of our two other priorities, the ground and commercial operations
There’s almost no argument that new investment is not required – investment in the team, the stadium and commercial operations. Few have examined the timing of this investment and the consequences of delay.
The time for new investment is now. The club cannot afford to wait any longer.
The new broadcasting deal which starts in season 2016-17 widens the gap between the successful clubs and the less successful.
Last year the club with the 7th highest broadcasting revenue (Everton) received £12.5 million less than the club receiving the most (Liverpool). In 2016-17 that gap will be £20.9 million. The gap between 1st and 10th in order of broadcasting revenue grows from £22 million to £35 million.
Tie that in with the difference in gate receipts and commercial income between Everton and our peers and you can clearly see that the income gap will widen further.
Not only that, but all our peers have a balance sheet which gives them the opportunity to spend heavily in the transfer window should they wish to do so.
The gap between the Premiership “haves” and “have nots” will continue to grow more quickly as the broadcasting deal revenues flow into the Premiership.
Paradoxically, the increase in revenues across the Premiership makes Everton more vulnerable on the pitch, and importantly for the Board (who own 70%) of the club, makes the equity value of the club more vulnerable also. Why? Because as the income and balance sheet gaps between Everton and our peers grow, the amount of investment required to bridge the gap increases, thereby reducing the current value of the equity.
Similarly if the value of the equity falls then the cost to existing shareholders of future capital raisings through issuing new shares increases.
Inactivity now threatens the value of the Board members individual holdings.
Control (or loss of) is often a reason quoted for the Board not to issue new equity in return for new investment. The Board can issue more than 12,500 shares without subscribing for shares themselves before losing control.
If the club is worth £140 million, then the shares are worth £4,000 each – that being the case the club can raise £50 million without subscribing for new shares, nor losing control. If the figure of £200 million is used, then over £70 million can be raised.
The point though is that to do this it must be done now. Failure to re-capitalise the business now will significantly reduce the Board’s ability to do so in the future, and will significantly reduce the value of their holdings.
£50 or £70 million will not solve Everton’s capital requirements, but it would allow investment in our key assets, the playing squad.
I’ll talk further next time about the funding of our two other priorities, the ground and commercial operations
Foot Long Hot Dog
Player Valuation: A packet of pork scratchings
..and in doing so avoid the actual point I was making about the intangible assets.
It's your MO, you've been doing it for a decade, I'll leave it there mate. Cheers
Yid4life
Player Valuation: £35m
Lamela was £25mn plus add-ons.
pablo 1878
Player Valuation: £8m
Apologies if this has already been posted, couldn't see anything from a quick glance.
Has anyone on Twitter been following @WatchedToffee? Has been posting a lot of interesting stuff about club finances over the last couple of days. Seems to know quite a bit about the running of the club.
He's been involved in a running conversation with Paul Tyrrell (once of our parish) this evening, after Tyrrell was apparently told by an ex-colleague to keep an eye on WatchedToffee's account. Begs the question why Tyrrell would have any interest given he is not (officially) employed by the club, although it would suggest that someone somewhere wants him to keep an eye on what's being said. A couple of interesting points that came up (including comments from other parties) were that Tyrrell kept a dossier on RS fans who were critical of their club whilst he was employed by them. Also, the Twitter name WatchedToffee possibly takes inspiration from a dossier of EFC fans named "Watched Toffees"
Gonna keep an eye on this one.
Has anyone on Twitter been following @WatchedToffee? Has been posting a lot of interesting stuff about club finances over the last couple of days. Seems to know quite a bit about the running of the club.
He's been involved in a running conversation with Paul Tyrrell (once of our parish) this evening, after Tyrrell was apparently told by an ex-colleague to keep an eye on WatchedToffee's account. Begs the question why Tyrrell would have any interest given he is not (officially) employed by the club, although it would suggest that someone somewhere wants him to keep an eye on what's being said. A couple of interesting points that came up (including comments from other parties) were that Tyrrell kept a dossier on RS fans who were critical of their club whilst he was employed by them. Also, the Twitter name WatchedToffee possibly takes inspiration from a dossier of EFC fans named "Watched Toffees"
Gonna keep an eye on this one.
NewRadical
Player Valuation: £30m
I'm sure that story about Tyrrell was published in a local newspaper, while he was employed by us, and he soon left his role at our club.
pablo 1878
Player Valuation: £8m
Yeah, your probably right, couldn't recall the exact circumstances surrounding his leaving the club. Seems curious he is keeping an eye on this particular account in the current climate of anti-board chatter on Twitter.
WatchedToffee has suggested he/she is just a fan but seems to be bang on the money with regards to club finances. Might just be well read on the club accounts but was quoting conditions of our financing arrangements this afternoon which were very detailed.
Dithering Dougie
Banned
Thanks pal, I read it was £26m a few times elsewhere.
Can I ask you what you previous incoming transfer record was before Bale's sale?
The Equaliser
Player Valuation: £50m
They paid £26m for Soldado I think.
Dithering Dougie
Banned
joey_macmo
Player Valuation: £35m
That's fantastic, still doesn't even come close to proving your point.
Dithering Dougie
Banned
Maybe read back a bit Joey before jumping in all defensive.
The point clearly is people have been claiming Everton have or are falling behind other teams in many ways, this biggest and longest grumble being transfers. Yet even our closets rival who had a huge cash windfall recently haven't been able to beat our record transfer fee.
joey_macmo
Player Valuation: £35m
Just this summer
Cech
Alderweild
Schweinstiger
Let's throw in Ayew from Swansea on a free as a bit of a bonus
- Status