[Football] The cost of promotion: Wolves had losses of £1,200,000 a week last season

[McTavish]

Unless I'm missing something £1.211m times 52 comes to more than £446m

It's a slightly confusing tweet. Wolves lost £1,211,000 million a week or £63 million over the year. £446 million is the total Championship losses reported so far (Ithink that's it anyway).

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Eh? Give your head a wobble!

Losses for the whole of the Championship are £446 million.

Wolves losses of £1.2m a week come to £63m for them alone.

£1.211m times 52 = £62.9m

Yep ..... funny five minutes here !

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Losses for the whole of the Championship are £446 million.

Wolves losses of £1.2m a week come to £63m for them alone.

View attachment 105290

It's crazy to see that not a single club in that division managed to at least break even, whether they set out at the start of the season with the aim of fighting for promotion, fighting against relegation or just to remain a safe, mid table side which hasn't had to gamble to try to achieve their aim

For such a great division (very competitive) its lack of income generation is very telling, and the disparity in incomes between them and the Premier League being such a factor that leads clubs to gamble to this extent. It can't go on with this level of losses without something eventually giving (may be a load of clubs going into admin / broke)

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Unless I'm missing something £1.211m times 52 comes to more than £446m

I don’t think you’ll ever mention graphs to me again!

 

[spence]

Don't think so!

Villa only lost 32 million ?

 

[cardboard]

Villa only lost 32 million ?

Parachute payments

 

[father_and_son]

It's crazy to see that not a single club in that division managed to at least break even, whether they set out at the start of the season with the aim of fighting for promotion, fighting against relegation or just to remain a safe, mid table side which hasn't had to gamble to try to achieve their aim

For such a great division (very competitive) its lack of income generation is very telling, and the disparity in incomes between them and the Premier League being such a factor that leads clubs to gamble to this extent. It can't go on with this level of losses without something eventually giving (may be a load of clubs going into admin / broke)

A level of loss is "acceptable" to a number of owners because they are leveraging the club for other income (just a kudos thing). In other cases, it is owners happy to continue to fund the club without expecting anything back and, as you say, for many it is a gamble to try to hit the big time and improve their financial position (either in terms of income or in terms of selling the asset for a profit!)

I don't think this represents a greater or lesser risks of clubs going broke, just a continuation of the status quo.

 

[crodonilson]

Villa only lost 32 million ?

That was excluding wages, they paid their wages out of a parent company, Wolves wages for last season were £50m, Villa had overage ex PL players like JT and Bobby Snodgrass, Agbonlahor and Micah Richard so I reckon theres will be £60m+. So their total loss could be close to £100m

 

[nwgull]

That was excluding wages, they paid their wages out of a parent company, add that on and it's around £85 million loss.

I do like your beard.

 

[El Presidente]

Villa only lost 32 million ?

£32m in 2016/17, expecting to receive the 17/18 figures at 6am tomorrow.

 

[El Presidente]

That was excluding wages, they paid their wages out of a parent company, add that on and it's around £85 million loss.

Villa figures are for the group but relate to previous season (16/17).

 

[Weststander]

That's the difference, we stayed within the rules. You know, a bit like a striker scoring a goal when he's just onside!!!

How could anyone argue with this post?

 

[Weststander]

It's crazy to see that not a single club in that division managed to at least break even, whether they set out at the start of the season with the aim of fighting for promotion, fighting against relegation or just to remain a safe, mid table side which hasn't had to gamble to try to achieve their aim

For such a great division (very competitive) its lack of income generation is very telling, and the disparity in incomes between them and the Premier League being such a factor that leads clubs to gamble to this extent. It can't go on with this level of losses without something eventually giving (may be a load of clubs going into admin / broke)

Championship club income hasn't crashed in the last 10 years.

These huge losses have largely arisen from clubs spending far more on transfer fees and player wages, than they did. As you say, gambling.

 

[Pavilionaire]

So in our promotion season we lost £36mill, bringing cumulative losses to just over £127mill.

This puts Chris Hughton's tactics into some kind of perspective because with just a few seasons in the Prem you can pay off a huge chunk of those losses.

Interestingly, Bournemouth got promoted with £192mill of cumulative losses and 3 years later despite the Prem riches their losses are now £207mill.

 

[Weststander]

So in our promotion season we lost £36mill, bringing cumulative losses to just over £127mill.

This puts Chris Hughton's tactics into some kind of perspective because with just a few seasons in the Prem you can pay off a huge chunk of those losses.

Interestingly, Bournemouth got promoted with £192mill of cumulative losses and 3 years later despite the Prem riches their losses are now £207mill.

That's quite hard to do, when the club's original cost base is so high, plus the costs of meeting the need for better players and their higher wages, to keep us in the PL.

I wonder if TB will settle for break even results for 2018/19, 2019/20, etc?

 

[crodonilson]

Villa figures are for the group but relate to previous season (16/17).

They've released their figures for 17/18 which are 35m loss but not the group which includes their massive wage bill. I think they're going to blow Wolves figures out of the water.

 

[spence]

That's quite hard to do, when the club's original cost base is so high, plus the costs of meeting the need for better players and their higher wages, to keep us in the PL.

I wonder if TB will settle for break even results for 2018/19, 2019/20, etc?

Surely we are heading for 20 million profit for this season if we finish 15th again ? We spent roughly the same in transfer fees as last season. We had to spend around 10 million for stadium improvements to comply with Premier league rules. We had a profit of 11 million last season and so 20 million isn't unreasonable and we are still in the cup. Prize money in each round has gone up quite a bit.
[MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]

 

[Pavilionaire]

That's quite hard to do, when the club's original cost base is so high, plus the costs of meeting the need for better players and their higher wages, to keep us in the PL.

I wonder if TB will settle for break even results for 2018/19, 2019/20, etc?

I agree it is hard to do. The variance between clubs is startling; Watford can up with modest cumulative losses of a few million, while their last accounts show they re profitable with £3mill+ of shareholder's funds. The ability to make chunks out of cumulative losses at our level is to be able to sell a player for £40mill and replace him with a cheaper but equally effective replacement.

It's interesting that Palace, Watford and Bournemouth have all kept keys players like Zaha, Deeney and Wilson and all three clubs are comfortable in this division.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I don’t think you’ll ever mention graphs to me again!

What's a graph ??

 

[portlock seagull]

I’m not sure losses is the right word in football. Buying a club is like a new car which depreciates (losses) until such a time as you replace it (new owner). Has ever been thus.