Why do Everton have to make back £35m? They haven't spent that much, have they? Virtually nothing this summer, IIRC.
I believe the estimated figure that they're quoting is based over three years, and in Everton's case they haven't actually made much on transfers in the past couple of windows 2019-20 Spent - £105m+ Received - £62m + a few undisclosed fees 2020-21 Spent - £70m on Allan, Doucore, Godfrey and King Received - £6m for Schneiderlin and a couple of reserves, plus a bunch of players leaving on frees 2021-2 Spent - £1.7m Received - £8m So over that time period Spent - £175m+ Received - £76m
I wouldn't be surprised if the signings of Rodriguez and Kean bloated their wage bill - and they surely paid through the nose on agent's fees on both, considering who their agents are
Kane only gets sold if Conte says so and as Conte should get want he wants I will trust his judgement. If it were me, and Kanes tarts himself out again I'd tell him to get someone to pay £130m or in city's case £175m or be prepared to sit out the rest of his contract in the under 23s.
It's worth asking what some of the signing fees for their free transfers were Rodriguez obviously would've been hefty given he's a Mendes client, and it's worth asking what Rondon and/or Townsend set them back
Sorry was wrong...the last figure was 2019-20 Was 85% of turnover Could well have gone up too cos of the complete lockdown last season! To put that in perspective, ours was 39%!
Nobody's on outrageous wages, as far as I can see, but they've got a few decent earners. Mina, Richarlison and a couple of others are on £100k+ pw, as you'd expect. Their revenue is miles behind the so-called Big Six, though. 2019 revenue in Euros, according to Deloitte: Man Utd: 580, Liverpool: 558, City: 549, Chelsea: 469, Spurs: 445, Arsenal: 388, Everton: 212. They're well placed against the other sides looking to step up, too. Leicester: 171, Palace: 161, West Ham: 158, Sheffield Utd(!): 152, Wolves: 151.
I`ve been saying for years that Levy`s constant pleading of poverty is mugging the fans off, and that just about confirms it. If they wanted to, ENIC could quite easily spend big money to elevate us, without breaching FFP or putting the club in financial difficulty, but choose not to in favour of the balance sheet.
Just because I can fit ten Rolexes on each arm, that doesn’t mean I can buy twenty Rolexes - just like how the club can spend £400m and comply with FFP doesn’t mean the club has £400m to chuck around Either people are setting themselves up for disappointment with that £400m estimate, or they're creating a Narrative to moan about while ignoring the article they're quoting actually says
The club's got enormous long term debt and assets that should pay off that debt, again in the long term. What it doesn't have is enough cash to address the drift in the football team and carry out the numerous development projects, for which planning permissions were renewed last month. All of that £400m FFP complaint money has been spent - and the balance of our spending and the priorities of the club haven't been on football, as the £400m figure indicates all too clearly. If ENIC want to entertain CL nights, or even EL nights in our new stadium, they're going to have to find the cash from somewhere to replace sufficient of that £400m to give Conte a squad to compete. ENIC could have a rights issue, or make the club a loan, or sell some development projects. Lewis can do this with the stroke of a pen, he just has to be motivated to do it. I don't understand why any Spurs fan would be against this. ENIC value the club in excess of £2 billion. Their current investment is about £50m, or 2.5% of its estimated value. The ****ers need to put in some more cash. It'll give them some short term pain...but **** 'em, they've done great out of their investment already. Chucking in £200m isn't going to kill them or us. Given that the majority shareholding sits with Tavistock and Joe Lewis, who is richer than God, there's zero chance of the club going bust...and in 'Daring To Do' they might actually get their snouts in the Super League trough, which they're definitely counting on. I think it will happen to some degree, because ENIC can't risk the the club falling back into long term mediocrity, leading to a mutiny of the fans. It's just whether they scrimp on it....again.
Agree with most of this but the reason we have got such a good deal on borrowing is because it is all backed by long term assets. If it was your £400m how much return would you need to invest it? Most investors want something above 15% for new capital. What has to happen over five years to increase the value of the club by £800m to get that rate of return? Everyone except me seems to agree that our recruitment hasn't returned value for money. How would you persuade an investor that the 400m is actually going to get a return?
Once again, this is what the article you're claiming to quote actually says An analysis of top flight clubs undertaken for Sportsmail by Kieran Maguire, a lecturer in football finance at the University of Liverpool, estimates what each club could spend and still stay within the FFP limit. It does not say the club has £400m to spend, because you are either setting yourself up for disappointment or looking for an excuse to moan all summer long and are looking to twist whatever facts to suit your narrative
I'm not and have never suggested £400m for transfers and/or wages. Half of that, in the right hands, would give the new coach a chance and would place us in the right situation regarding investment over the last few years. That PLUS any money from sales. I'd like an extra amount to be put into the club to fund development projects, or we'll be back in this position in 2 or 3 years, as football income of all sorts will again spent on non-football projects. That's a proper balanced long term view of the club's projects and their funding. The Nike kit, AIA, Getir, Cinch, all of those deals will pay more if the club wins something and/or is in the top European competitions. When United nearly failed to get into the CL for 2 consecutive seasons, it was suggested that their kit deal's value would diminish by half. Our deals will be similarly structured. There's the return from the European Super League (it's coming) and a successful team in the CL might secure us a stadium sponsorship deal. Plus, the NFL and all of their non-sporting, development aspirations. They're not going to get to carry those out unless the football club remains in a state that the fans will accept. If ENIC lose the fans' support, it's all out of reach for them. ENIC'S current level of return is 4,000 times their original investment. Given their current return and their aspirations sporting and non-sporting, I'd say that they, can, should and need to pump some money in. Pissing money away on hiring and then paying off manager after manager, who are doomed to fail because the squad's too weak, thus angering the fans, isn't good business, it's penny wise/pound foolish stupidity. I think that they will see that it's inescapable from where we currently are...we shall see.
For the third time An article which estimates we could spend £400m and comply with FFP ≠ An article saying we actually have £400m to spend
