Basic economics says that whoever holds the asset that's in short supply will take the profit. In football, it's the players. There is a genuine dearth of people who are good enough to play Premier League football, so even without further investigation you can be sure it's the players who take the lion's share. Vin
Not quite sure where some of the doom and gloom is coming from. Wait for the detailed breakdown, but this is buried in the Echo article: Top-line "profit" numbers aren't really that important...it was higher in years past while accumulating debt, and it's likely lower this year owing to depreciation/amortization while we're accumulating cash. Otherwise, we wouldn't have enough of a cash inflow that Liebherr could pay off a sizable portion of the debt to herself.
All about buying the best possible players for your budget. No point in spending more money for the sake of it, regardless if you have it to spend or not.
i don't mind our policy. But it seems like Rodgers is trying to put some positive spin on our spending and make us look as some big spenders, when in reality we're far from it, when you put it in perspective.
Last years contract extentions would have grown the wages quite a lot though, and they won't have made it into this release.
Absolutely, though the bonuses are likely included in this set...Virgil's extension was announced May 6th, and he presumably received a wedge for signing on (as did his agent). The year-end is in a strange place, on June 30th; a fair amount of offseason activity ends up in the previous year.
Another interesting thing about June 2016 is that everything in the UK including football clubs became 20% cheaper to foreign bastards investors.
Some helpful fellow on here, can't remember whom, usually helps to put the full figures into perspective once they are released.
http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/45306/ Blog from Ugly Inside saying what most of us know....apart from melt-downers (mainly on Saintsweb). Saints have to operate within different parameters from the top clubs....we cannot throw money at everything....we have to trade players, whilst still maintaining our standards on the pitch. It may appear to outsiders that we are trading down, but, in general, we come out of it very well as we buy new and cheaper players with potential. We have invested some of our money in wages to make us more attractive and to encourage players to sign longer contracts. It's a balancing act.....which we are good at. In fact, for a team of our size, it's the only game in town.
That's a good article. I like the way it confirms that we are being run how Markus intended now Katharina is in charge. Some fans seem to confuse Cortese's plan with Markus's.
Yes, we don't hear any more about taking our own mattresses to hotels. Good idea, but a bit on the expensive side.
How and when is the Premier League Prize money paid in to us, and when does it become effective in our circumstances? Does our current debt burden rely on it's delivery to pay it off?
Rodgers said that the present accounts are based on the old Sky deal, so that figure will be higher next year. I suppose some may be used to reduce the debt, but a lot of it may be set aside for other outgoings, such as increased player wages. He also mentioned money that had to be out layed to provide the services that Sky expect to be in place.
The main pot of money is paid in increments over the course of the season. The merit payments happen once the season concludes and league position is determined. Regarding our current debt, it's somewhat inconsequential at this point. It isn't particularly large relative to our turnover, and most or all of it will vanish when we find a buyer for the club; the only effect of reducing it in the interim is to increase Liebherr's take in the sale.