DAVID MOYES’ brutally honest assessment of Sunderland’s financial position has resulted in two key questions being asked. Why, at a time when more money is flowing into the Premier League than ever before, is the club unable to compete with the vast majority of its top-flight rivals? And is Sunderland’s owner, Ellis Short, ultimately the one to blame? The answer to the first question is relatively simple, and is contained within the club’s most recent set of accounts, which covered the period to the end of the 2014-15 season. To put it succinctly, Sunderland are in a financial mess. Whichever measure of a club’s financial performance you choose, the Black Cats do not fare well. Their most recent annual loss was £25m, an increase of 49 per cent on the season before. Only two Premier League clubs posted a bigger loss – QPR and Aston Villa. And we all know what happened to them. The wage bill rose by 11 per cent to £77.1m (the ninth highest in the Premier League), a figure that represents an alarming 76 per cent of turnover. Only QPR squandered a higher proportion of their income on wages. Sunderland’s revenue was only the 15th highest in the top-flight (three of the clubs below them were relegated), yet their annual interest payments almost trebled to £6m. This is a club that is haemorrhaging money, and it has been for quite some time. Sunderland haven’t posted a profit since 2006, and in the last nine seasons, their total losses before tax amount to £170m. As a result, their gross debt has risen to a point where it is just about unsustainable. Since 2009, Sunderland’s debt has almost trebled to £141m, with £58m owed directly to Short and £83m owed as part of a new borrowing arrangement with Security Benefit Corporation (SBC). Of that £83m, £68m is in the form of a loan, with £15m committed to a revolving credit facility. Year on year, Sunderland’s financial position has grown worse. Why? Because a ridiculous amount of money has been squandered on making bad signings and paying off bad managerial appointments. With that in mind, is it any wonder Short is wanting to adapt the way his club does its business? In the last four seasons of published accounts, Sunderland had a net annual transfer spend of £18m. That was the eighth highest in the Premier League. Suffice to say, the Black Cats have not been finishing in the top eight in the table. Spending big money on players is not always a route to financial meltdown of course. If those players hold their value, and are sold for either the same sum or a profit, a club can tick over quite nicely without the need for borrowing or outside investment. At Sunderland, though, that has simply not happened. In the last nine seasons (not including either of the last two summers), it is estimated the club made a grand total of £38m from player sales. That is a drop in the ocean compared to what was splashed out. Darren Bent and Simon Mignolet are two of the few players to have increased in value during their time on Wearside, with Jordan Henderson, who made a £26m move to Liverpool, representing a rare success from the club’s academy. Beyond that, though? A weird and wonderful hotchpotch of players who were signed seemingly off the cuff, and who cost Sunderland money. This summer’s dealings, while not included in any published accounts, provide a perfect example. Steven Fletcher and Danny Graham – signed for £17m; released for nothing at the end of their deals. Throw in their wages, and that’s the best part of £25m that Sunderland might as well have tossed down the drain. Emanuele Giaccherini - sold for £1.5m; bought for £8.5m two years earlier. That’s just the tip of an iceberg big enough to sink a football club, let alone a boat. Sunderland are paying for a succession of dreadful deals, but the issue of who is to blame is a thorny one. Is Short responsible? The somewhat unsatisfactory answer is yes and no. The one thing Sunderland’s Irish-American owner cannot be accused of is a refusal to spend any money. Had Short not propped the club up with his own cash after the original Drumaville consortium racked up a huge amount of debt, the administrators might well have been running things at the Stadium of Light before now. Short has loaned around £160m of his own money to Sunderland, and unlike Newcastle owner Mike Ashley, whose support comes in the form of a series of interest-free loans that could theoretically be called in at any time, the Black Cats custodian has capitalised £100m of his debt, meaning he can only recoup it if he sells the club at a certain price. http://m.thenorthernecho.co.uk/spor...e_financially___and_is_Ellis_Short_to_blame_/
That is pretty worrying. I only hope we have a decent season , get most of that debt paid off and start running the club a lot better than it has been.
I think it hinges on that "decent season". Comfortable mid-table (which is next level for us) may bring better players. But I look at the ones who've gone (Danny Graham £30k, Fletcher £50k, Bridcutt £20k, Gomez £10k, Kaboul £30k, Buckley £10k - I am sure I read that we refused to pay any of his wages for the loan) and there's probably more from that list. Paired with Yedlin and M'Vila's wages which we are not paying towards, I reckon somewhere near (or over) £200k a week has been saved in wages. I don;t know what the new lads are on but I'd certainly hope it wasn't that much. The increase in wages would be the problem for us, but, due to that many players leaving, we should cover that now. It's speculation I know but that's the way I see it
It is a point I have been arguing for weeks with loads of people who are saying that Short is just pocketing all the money.
I'd wager Buckley would have been on the same as Bridcutt. I also reckon we'll have been daft enough that Gomez will have been on about 30k (experienced premier league player on a free transfer).
It's depressing but I'd rather know the reality of it so I can adjust expectations. Moyes is definitely the man for the task, he's the perfect manager to improve us on the cheap and turn our fortunes around. In theory that is.
Add Alfie to that list aswell. We bought him for 3.5m, let him go on loan a year later and then eventually sold him for 1.5m. Villareal have recently just paid 6m for him.
Shorty, find a ****ing buyer & **** off back to Texas yer yank twat. ****ing disgraceful state of affairs. Ashley runs a better show than this ****er.
I know those numbers were what I think they might have been on - could be more or less (think Graham might actually have been on more than £30k!)
We also signed Mavrias for 3m and Karlsson for 2m. Both had next to no first team action but add the transfer fee up and put their wages togeather and that could have equated to one decent regular first team player.
Sorry Billy, but this paragraph tells me much differently: "Short has loaned around £160m of his own money to Sunderland, and unlike Newcastle owner Mike Ashley, whose support comes in the form of a series of interest-free loans that could theoretically be called in at any time, the Black Cats custodian has capitalised £100m of his debt, meaning he can only recoup it if he sells the club at a certain price." Ashley could send them right up the ****ter if he wanted to at any point. They're also in more debt than us for the same period (£139 vs £129m I believe) Short couldn't recall his loans as he has capitalised them - therefore, unless the club sells for a certain amount, he can't have his money back. Ashley can theorietically sell the club for 50p and ask for all of his money back. Or he could keep the club and ask them to pay him back from a business perspective. I know which one I'd rather have at the helm!!
THE WRONG MANAGERS WERE BROUGHT HERE EACH TIME is the answer. Selling Giacc first was a mistake then getting peanuts was worse, you seen him at the Euro's and now we miss him. The reason behind this is not getting the right manager from the start and investing in the right players then say Mancini/Ancellotti could just tinker by bringing another 3 or 4 quality players in each season, simple.. Marco gabby on the radio said are wages are probably £52m a season, but that is well within the T V money by about £70 m by my reckoning then there is the gate money to add about £12m, then merchandise and cup runs say £1m (I don't know about the concerts situation). What about Chelsea then how are they keep spending huge amounts ?. No matter what the situation is we need a striker to start with NOW, if not then it is goodbye to the premier league. They have had chance after chance to rebuild this club properly. Why not get Chinese investors into the club, they have at Liverpool. We should be buying players for £3-8m and selling them for huge amounts like Soton and Everton. Then the question is when will we get a top manager In and spend big money ? so the stay away supporters will know when to come back in the future, cause at this rate there will be 1000,s next season not coming back back.
Ive read one of Chinas most wealthiest men has taken a serious interest in buying short out. His names Cha Ching.
All the players that have gone we have to be saving a lot in wages. Also Coates, N'Doye, Brown and Harper
I've been saying for ages we're in massive debt. Short's company, it's his fault and his fault alone. Since he's tightened the belt we're running a year on year relegation gamble with the entire existence of our own club. I'd rather he gamble with his own money rather than the entire clubs existence. He got us in this mess after all. He needs to invest more of his own money into the club, back the manager he claims he's been chasing for 5 years, and install a spine so that we can afford the quiet windows we need to sort our finances out. If we go down there's a massive and scary chance we'll become the next Leeds. Don't think for a second Short won't put us into administration. If he won't invest more to keep us up, he defiantly won't be putting more money in once the damning blow is delivered. It would be like keeping a life support machine on when there's no sign of brain activity to his wallet. He came in when Keane had only kept us up one season, invested initially but entrusted his money to a financial liability in Quinn. He was unlucky with MoN, but his thinking was for once on the right track but it just didn't work out. It happens, one of those things. But than he changed his mission statement radically, became obsessed with hiring cheep 'up and coming' managers, something teams with midtable squads of their respective leagues can try, installing a DoF infrastructure as an unstable lower table club. Become sack happy and locked up his wallet. It's a ****ing car crash list of irrational sweeping changes to an unstable club. He's ran us into the ground. No doubt about that in his mind.
Totally agree mate.. There will always be differences of opinion on this by the fans just like it is on all Sunderland forums.. What I would like to know is just how much we have wasted paying of failed DOF's and managers since Ellis sort of turned up.. I have my opinions on Ellis Short and I really do think he has left us well short.. He will have his agenda, I have my head around what I think it is but I'm ****ed if I'm going to fall out with anyone on here with my opinions of the man.. Cracking post mate..
The AOL has been a complete let down, great facilities, players coming through, not a lot, a player isn't borne great, they have to work at it, the youth system should be our bread and butter, not sure where the problem lies. Coaches not good enough. Managers disregarding youth Out on loan, come back see we have just signed Johnny foreigner in his position, even further down the pecking order, want to move. I do think we have the best manager now to bring youth forward, but he still needs a healthy balance. Our venture into Africa and Asia (with Ji and pre season friendlies) have been complete disasters. I could go on and on, but I would probably end up topping myself, we are in a right bloody pickle though.
