What's new

Spurs finances report 22/23 (swissramble writeup)

McFlash

Without doubt the dumbest & most clueless member.
Oct 19, 2005
13,640
49,755
I do disagree to an extent. Money underpins thing but Cup success on its own does help too. I think the Ange stuff is more than just PR - I think he wants to win everything. If you build a squad that can win the League then they’re going to be able to win the Cups too - at least that’s what history tells us.

Since we won the FA Cup in 91, Arsenal have won it 9 times, Chelsea 7 times, Man U 5, Liverpool 4. Man City have won it twice, both in the last five years. Do we think they prioritised the Cups? Naah, they just had more money and better squads than anyone else.
I think we're saying the same thing really.
We all want a cup win but they're not easy to get and it's not like we haven't come close but with more money comes a better squad and a better chance of winning a cup.
 

BehindEnemyLines

Twisting a Melon with the Rev. Black Grape
Apr 13, 2006
4,779
14,091
Yep, that all makes sense. I wanted to make sure I wasn't wildly off with the reading of it!

As you say, the 23/24 results will be the big sale of Kane in amongst greater amortised contracts, plus the reduction of some high wages I would suppose. And what will be a roughly £65m sized hole in the books due to no Europe. Hard to know exactly how that will shake out, but it seems more like us being in a stable position rather than a powerhouse one.

Can't wait to see Chelsea get absolutely fucked by all this.
It's worth contextualising this against the competition. Not many PL clubs have anywhere near the leeway that we have, and most are in a somewhat awkward predicament that will entail them selling off assets in the final few weeks of this coming June........in that context, a stable position has equivalency to a powerhouse one!

Levy is rubbing his hands together at the opportunity that will open in mid-June (and future Junes)......assuming the PL don't agree to the proposed changes.
 

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
5,590
8,504
Can't wait to see Chelsea get absolutely fucked by all this.
Chelsea still say they comply with all the UEFA & PL financial regulations in their latest results but I believe it's been reported that they will need to make sales before 30th June to comply in this financial year, should be fun to see how it goes.

 
Last edited:

newbie

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2004
6,245
6,674
Surely us earning more money is a good thing as long as it gets invested into the club and not into ENIC's pockets?

Also, isn't it the wage bill, rather than the purchase price of players which gives the biggest chance of success - ie the clubs with the highest wage bill tend to win the most as the quality of the whole squad is better, not just one or two superstars.

I thought the report shows that our spending on wages has increased dramatically, but I'm not a financial whizz and maybe have missed something?

tbh I think (although agree) wage bill is an issue, if you sign players on big wages you can’t get rid of them.

I think buying players like Vdv and Johnson there wages are t that high so they are lower risk
 

muppetman

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2011
9,784
27,366
tbh I think (although agree) wage bill is an issue, if you sign players on big wages you can’t get rid of them.

I think buying players like Vdv and Johnson there wages are t that high so they are lower risk
We're in a tricky place where we don't pay the wages of the really top teams, but do overpay for most teams across Europe - quite a tough balancing act.

I thought we were relatively low wage payers but loads of bonuses, so it can change dramatically if we get top 4, win a cup, score 400 goals or whatever the targets are, which has always seemed quite sensible. However, even then how many clubs outside of the PL can afford players on £100k a week?
 

HodisGawd

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2005
1,754
6,035
It's almost as if some people don't believe that football clubs are a business...

Please stop moaning about us being a well run, financially sustainable organisation. Stop benchmarking against those clubs around us that have or will soon have their comeuppance for breaching spending parameters or outright fraud. This desire for instant gratification in modern society is unedifying and, frankly, irresponsible and unrealistic. I for one would far prefer to support and be proud of a club and a team that does things the right way, within their means, and with a consistent view to incremental improvement through sustainable means.
Such a good comment I'm reposting it.
 

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
5,590
8,504
On the subject of finances and competing with the other top clubs , we need quality players and quality players want top money in their wage packets to come to the club and for that we need to earn plenty .

Not sure if this has been highlighted previously , if you go into the full accounts 22/23 the money earned from getting to the round of 16 in Champions League was £56.2 million , money earned from domestic cups , 5th round FA cup and 3rd round EFL cup was £0.2 million.
 
Last edited:

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
5,590
8,504
Still not entirely clear how they are going to work out these ratios , as the rules mention that fees paid out to agents are also taken into consideration, where are they included in the accounts?
Our 46% wage to revenue ratio is for everyone employed at the club not just the playing squads, so that £251 million wage bill includes gardeners, kitchen staff , cleaners and Levy with his £6 million +.
 

dovahkiin

Damn you're ugly !
May 18, 2012
3,454
90,974
kieran macguire talking spurs finances on lwos if anyone cares to listen
and post a summary for those of us that cant be bothered
 

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
5,590
8,504
kieran macguire talking spurs finances on lwos if anyone cares to listen
and post a summary for those of us that cant be bothered
Probably common knowledge (new to me) but gives details of Maddison transfer.
 

N17-77

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2007
222
655
I'm sorry to be thick but can someone explain the profit and loss bit. Did we make a loss overall ? If so why did we still make some sort of profit? It's the quoting of both that's confusing me.
It's to do with which items are cash-flow related. Companies typically look at their Operating Profit (or Loss). So, the actual money received (e.g. ticket sales, matchday sales of food and drink, merchandise, tv money, prize money and sponsorship) less the actual money spent (firstly wages on players and other employees, cost of running the stadium and other facilties like energy, cost of goods (e.g. food and merch bought then sold). After all of that you get EBITDA (earning before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation).

So, we have a healthy operating profit.

After all of that, you then have things like depreciation - essentially large capital items (like buildings [stadium], computers, vehicles, plant and machinery) are given a lifespan and their cost is spread over that period, irrespective of when the cash is actually paid (typically up front in pure cash; sometimes funded with loans etc).
To add more complication, there is Player Trading, also treated 'below the line' - when a player signs they become an asset to the club, with their value reduced proportionally year-on-year over the duration of their contract.

On those measures we have a technical loss - a large part of which is the interest payments and depreciation allocation on the stadium.


To complicate things further, PSR and FFP look at a different measure again, with some operating expenses being allowable.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
47,081
106,044
All the interesting bits come from Kieran Maguire , it's a long watch unless anyone knows how to block the adverts.

It’s good, if what he says is accurate. Investment (for the capital projects) is further down the line than we think. Last 25 minutes about the PL screwing up the Man City charges by setting an incredibly high burden of proof is disconcerting for those of us who thought they might get punished effectively.
 

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
5,590
8,504
It’s good, if what he says is accurate. Investment (for the capital projects) is further down the line than we think. Last 25 minutes about the PL screwing up the Man City charges by setting an incredibly high burden of proof is disconcerting for those of us who thought they might get punished effectively.
I did like Kieran's joke about who was most responsible for Brighton's current financial position.
As you say it was a very good interview, with him stating what we all know and that Spurs financially are a very well run club also that there has been commitment to improve the squad with wage increases and acquisitions in the transfer market whether they are the right players is open to debate.
He is correct about proof in City case, trying to prove corporate fraud is difficult but I am hoping that as the PL investigators had the evidence of the CAS ruling to examine that they have come up with a better case and maybe extra evidence.
 

muppetman

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2011
9,784
27,366
What I took from it is that we are a well run club BUT we are still "best of the rest", with City, Liverpool, Chelsea and ManU above us financially. Not quite sure where Arsenal stand and with owners not being able to continually pump money in though.
 

newbie

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2004
6,245
6,674
We also will have lost a lot of our big wage earners

kane, IP, Dier,

plus PEH, and a few others you would expect to go.

i think we are with good recruitment in a good position to push on.

if we sell and buy well plus get champs league we will look really good for the season after
 
Top