Financial Results 2015/2016

[Ashz09]

Quite a massive increase that.. We haven't really made much progress either. McLaren was right we stayed still whilst everyone else was moving forward. Maybe we was trying but we was purchasing players who are at the high end and wasn't really improving us.

Hopefully we manage to shift a lot of players. I miss the hard working team with something to prove and less money.. Hopefully Rowett get's the players who have came in on stupid wages to perform and show why we payed so much money (I'm sure Vydra will come good!). 

[ronnieronalde]

Blimey.

£32 million quid on wages.

It was 10m in 13/14 and the club was expected to be competing for the top 6.

Incredible backing by Mel but can't help thinking he's given his money to the wrong men. Much as Davies and Jewell shpunted the American's money, the previous managers of Derby County under Mel Morris have tliterally ook the piss with their spending.

I hope there's money in the pot for GR and he doesn't cop for sorting out the crap caused by others.

[IlsonDerby]

Just a side note, of those wages you have to remember that Hughes, Bryson and Foryths wages were all covered by insurance last season due to long term injuries... That's 2 decent earners right there. I bet there's 1.5m there that we didn't actually spend on wages. 

 

Doesnt hide ides the fact that realistically this summer we need to lose about 4 more players than we bring in. So if we wanna bring in 2 players I would suggest we'd need to lose 6. Doable as well if you consider there will be people who want Shackell, there will be people who want Weimann, Bent could be let go, Christie is probably fairly saleable, Camara probably holds a bit of value in the French league after his Angers performances. There's 5 players that could leave and as long as we bring in a centre back who can play a bit we wouldn't actually be that much weaker considering Anya can deputise for Baird?

 

[jono]

9 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

The quality of the squad will improve with a fully fit George Thorne, a rejuvenated Chris Martin and just playing Will Hughes.

I would suggest we don't need to spend a penny. If we can get one or two off the wage bill while getting those we've got to perform to anywhere near their capability in a system that suits them we'll be raite.

Spot on ! ... Remove 2 X 30 grand a weekers and you lop 3 million off the wage bill.  The under 23s should be some of the cover. We have plenty of players with enough ability. 

[Day]

Maybe we should pin this topic to remind people of the wage bill in the summer when they want us to compete with the Parachute boys for players, Newcastle last summer and Villa in January who reported to have quadrupled the midfield messiah Hourihane wages he was on at Barnsley. Lansbury also rolling in the dough at 40k a week (Source: Birmingham Mail).

It's no surprise the wage bill has rocketed after the summer of 15/16, looking back barely anyone posted at the time spare a thought for the wage bill, signings like Baird were met with minor groans yet now looks like one of the best signings we've made. 

Big name fancy signings that make your knees wobbly = ££££, lots of it. 

As I posted in another thread, £1.2b in 'soft loans' has gone into Championship clubs, over £100m at Brighton alone. I would be surprised if any club is sustainable in this league, there's a reason why Mel is leading the charge for better media rights in the Football League.

Kind of reminds you how lucky we are to have the revenue generating Pride Park and the fanbase we do.

[Day]

14 minutes ago, David said:

As I posted in another thread, £1.2b in 'soft loans' has gone into Championship clubs, over £100m at Brighton alone

Brighton have reported a loss of £25.8m, up from £10.4m. No mention of their wage bill. 

http://www.seagulls.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/brighton-hove-albion-3456363.aspx

Edit: Wage bill £27.5m, up from £20.6m the previous year

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/brighton-and-hove-albion-knockin-on.html

[Papahet]

Wage bill can't be that much of a issue otherwise I doubt we'd have handed  new contracts to Hughes and Martin.

 

[ramblur]

The 14/15 loss given of £10.1m included an exceptional item of £3m,so the real starting point of comparison(as that particular item can't be repeated in 15/16) is £13.1m,which means 15/16's £14.7m is only £1.6m higher loss. However,if you look at the differences stated,although turnover is up £1.1m,wages are up a massive £10.2m,so already £9.1m more net expenditure.Also, there's then a hefty undisclosed amount of extra amortisation to factor in,so the whole lot looks a heck of a lot more than £1.6m and the 'real' loss to me looks well over £20m. It seems that another even heftier exceptional item has again ridden to the rescue,and the only candidate I can see is a waiver of all,or the bulk,of the £12m Global Derby loan used to repay the bank loan,the rabbit in the hat I predicted a year ago.

The starting point for this season will then be over £20m and any available rabbit will likely be the reverse of the Malteaster bunny,with the body gobbled and the feet left.However,the saving grace is that whilst the book profit on Hendrick sale and Martin loan fee go straight to the bottom line,only the amortisation of Vydra/Anya get charged.As FFP exemptions seem to be running at £5m,I can see us falling comfortably within the £13m FFP threshold.

Looking at next year,again the starting point will be well over £20m,but this time although that extra amortisation will still be there,the transfer income from this season won't. Not all doom and gloom though as FFP now operates on a £39m revolving 3 year period and so we could afford an FFP loss of over £13m because of previous undershoots.We then have any changes made during the year,with the wage bill set to be reduced,so I reckon GR will have some transfer leeway,but not likely to be spectacular.

I doubt I'll be commenting when accounts are published as I've only really come back on to correct a blunder I made a year ago,if I can find the thread.  

[rynny]

6 minutes ago, ramblur said:

The 14/15 loss given of £10.1m included an exceptional item of £3m,so the real starting point of comparison(as that particular item can't be repeated in 15/16) is £13.1m,which means 15/16's £14.7m is only £1.6m higher loss. However,if you look at the differences stated,although turnover is up £1.1m,wages are up a massive £10.2m,so already £9.1m more net expenditure.Also, there's then a hefty undisclosed amount of extra amortisation to factor in,so the whole lot looks a heck of a lot more than £1.6m and the 'real' loss to me looks well over £20m. It seems that another even heftier exceptional item has again ridden to the rescue,and the only candidate I can see is a waiver of all,or the bulk,of the £12m Global Derby loan used to repay the bank loan,the rabbit in the hat I predicted a year ago.

The starting point for this season will then be over £20m and any available rabbit will likely be the reverse of the Malteaster bunny,with the body gobbled and the feet left.However,the saving grace is that whilst the book profit on Hendrick sale and Martin loan fee go straight to the bottom line,only the amortisation of Vydra/Anya get charged.As FFP exemptions seem to be running at £5m,I can see us falling comfortably within the £13m FFP threshold.

Looking at next year,again the starting point will be well over £20m,but this time although that extra amortisation will still be there,the transfer income from this season won't. Not all doom and gloom though as FFP now operates on a £39m revolving 3 year period and so we could afford an FFP loss of over £13m because of previous undershoots.We then have any changes made during the year,with the wage bill set to be reduced,so I reckon GR will have some transfer leeway,but not likely to be spectacular.

I doubt I'll be commenting when accounts are published as I've only really come back on to correct a blunder I made a year ago,if I can find the thread.  

Hi ramblur, hope you are well. Thank you for the time and effort you put into these summaries to help us folk that don't really understand the accounts fully.

[G STAR RAM]

Good to see you back @ramblur, even if it is just a fleeting visit, think a lot of us have been worried about you!

 

[ramblur]

11 hours ago, needles said:

Anyone know how ramblur is getting on? Or, erm, well...hope he's OK.

Thanks for asking,needles.Best I can say is that I've somehow managed to scrape through/survive the winter.A CT scan from last year did show that the pulmonary fibrosis has been arrested,although any damage done already can't be reversed which has serious winter (particularly) implications. I'm taking an infused drug (Rituximab) that seems to have blasted RA out of the water as well as controlling the fibrosis and blood clotting disorder.

The downside to this is that my immune system is so heavily suppressed that winter has been wall to wall colds /chest infections/both and thoroughly miserable.Autumn and spring aren't much better.I may be able to make the odd cameo appearance on rainy summer days.

Just to show how bad things have been,although I downloaded both the Global Derby and Gellaw 14/15 accounts I haven't looked at either yet.However,as far as the latter is concerned,last November (whilst looking at something else on CH) I noticed that Gellaw no longer holds the DCFC share capital as it appears to have been transferred to Sevco. The thing I was looking at was the issue of 520,000 new £1 shares in DCFC at a premium of £99/share,giving impressive proceeds of £52m.Thanks Mel! 

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, ramblur said:

The thing I was looking at was the issue of 520,000 new £1 shares in DCFC at a premium of £99/share,giving impressive proceeds of £52m.Thanks Mel! 

I posted about this a few months back.

An eye watering amount and I could not really work out what that amount would have been needed for?

I am guessing £12m was to clear the loan that paid the mortgage off and an amount to cover the cash deficit for 15/16 but that still leaves another £20m to £30m?

[Sparkle]

We can't hide from that wage bill it is bad reading,but mainly bad as we are paying for a lot of average players that were purchased during Clement's time

basically this means that wieman will be sold and Bent will leave.

[Day]

19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

An eye watering amount and I could not really work out what that amount would have been needed for?

I am guessing £12m was to clear the loan that paid the mortgage off and an amount to cover the cash deficit for 15/16 but that still leaves another £20m to £30m?

I was told he has spent around £20m since arriving on improving the infrastructure with Pride Park/Moor Farm improvements. 

Could that explain the unexplained? 

[Uptherams]

That wage increase. I hope we can reduce that by £10 million this summer with ease. Just half a dozen players that won't be offered extensions or who the club want to go could do that. The worry is how much we committed a few weeks after this. If we don't sell Hughes i can see this summer's transfer window being breakeven with fees. Some tough decisions will have to be made in regards to our men in the middle. 

[G STAR RAM]

13 minutes ago, David said:

I was told he has spent around £20m since arriving on improving the infrastructure with Pride Park/Moor Farm improvements. 

Could that explain the unexplained? 

Yes I expect this will make up some of the figure.

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

That wage increase. I hope we can reduce that by £10 million this summer with ease. Just half a dozen players that won't be offered extensions or who the club want to go could do that. The worry is how much we committed a few weeks after this. If we don't sell Hughes i can see this summer's transfer window being breakeven with fees. Some tough decisions will have to be made in regards to our men in the middle. 

£10m, that is £192k per week!

Which players would you like to see offloaded that you think amount to this wage bill?

And let's not forget that we need a willing buyer and the players are not likely to want to take a big pay cut if on a decent contract.

I remember part of 'The Derby Way' vision being adding value to players. Ince, Hughes and Keofh aside I don't think we would make profit on any of our players. If we reach the stage where simply have to sell our best players to subsidise overpaid average players then questions would need to be asked!

[Sith Happens]

They seem to know what they are doing...

Imagine reading Forests....

£X income from tickets

£x amount of wages

£30 million thrown down big black hole.

[ramblur]

34 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I posted about this a few months back.

An eye watering amount and I could not really work out what that amount would have been needed for?

I am guessing £12m was to clear the loan that paid the mortgage off and an amount to cover the cash deficit for 15/16 but that still leaves another £20m to £30m?

We won't know the cash deficit till the accounts are published,and as I pointed out the 'real' loss looks to have been well over £20m.If you factor in David's points and realise that some advance funding may have been needed to fund the start of this season (not much income from July 1st to kick off,yet some pretty hefty expenses to be met),you may get a bit closer to the £52m.

Repaying the £12m loan wouldn't generate the exceptional gain that 15/16 would appear to need.

For any that may feel uneasy that we may have followed the route that QPR (and now the Gumps) have taken,viz generating exceptional gains to influence losses,I'd point out that if I'm right the whole process would, in our case, have eliminated £15m of external debt. Given that one of the aims of FFP was to discourage new external debt/encourage its reduction,I don't think we should beat ourselves up over it.

[Day]

34 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

They seem to know what they are doing...

Imagine reading Forests....

£x amount of wages

 

I actually looked at Forest's earlier, their wage bill was £26.9m.

Now when you look at Brighton's which was £27.5m, they finished 3rd. Forest 16th....

I know people are a little shocked at ours being £32m, worth remembering the signings of Johnson and Butterfield were made to cover the loss of Hughes and Bryson, they would have made up for a chunk of that increase.

Not into guessing players wages but you would expect them to be amoungst the top earners at the club.