Riley McGree [Mail / Sun]

BoroMart said:
I have no idea what their profitability is, what debts they need to service, what other players they've bought.

We sold Ben Gibson and Adama Traore and hadn't got much to spend, sales are only part of the picture.
Click to expand...
I am no trained accountant but looking at the respective balance sheets of both clubs it is clear we are ramping up our debt to get back into the Premier League. I can’t speak for Celtic but they don’t need to spend big and they are financially very comfortable . They usually get into the Champions League every season anyway. It would be different if (god forbid) they were ever allowed to join the EFL. The Premier League is where the promised land of riches is and you have to hand it to Gibson he is seemingly going for it.

Now I am a massive Gibson fan and we keep our toes and fingers crossed we make it there in two seasons for his ambition is very clear. He is spending to get us there. If we don’t then we may have a different challenge on our hands.

PS and have just seen the Telegraph article about FFP and that we may be under scrutiny. It’s not plain sailing trying to get back into the PL.
 
Last edited:
Cardiffdaffs said:
I am no trained accountant but looking at the respective balance sheets of both clubs it is clear we are ramping up our debt to get back into the Premier League.
Click to expand...
Agreed, that's probably the case......however that is an option we have as part of our strategy that Celtic don't. So regardless of how we fund and finance, the reality is that we can and have competed, which is the point of this.
 
BoroMart said:
Agreed, that's probably the case......however that is an option we have as part of our strategy that Celtic don't. So regardless of how we fund and finance, the reality is that we can and have competed, which is the point of this.
Click to expand...
No Celtic do have that option but they choose not to. That is the point.
 
Cardiffdaffs said:
Now I am a massive Gibson fan and we keep our toes and fingers crossed we make it there in two seasons for his ambition is very clear. He is spending to get us there. If we don’t then we may have a different challenge on our hands.
Click to expand...
We have a 3-4 year cycle effectively because of FFP. We threw the dice 4 years ago, it failed and we started to reduce everything. We have now started to clear the Monk experimental failure from the FFP window, Britt's ample wages and transfer feefor example, will reduce from the FFP calcs by 33% at the end of this season.

Last FFP Britt will have cost 11.25 in wages and 6.75m in wages. Total 18m
This season it will be 7.5 transfer fee and 4.6 wages. Total 12.m

That's a 6m FFP difference and even if we fail to go up, the following FFP will see another 6m disappear off Britt.

That's just one player in Britt. There are plenty of others, some that were expensive signings and some that were on prem uplifted wages like Ayala and Downing that had no transfer fee when they left, so they are just cost on our FFP.

As long as Gibson covers the debt, it doesn't really matter how big it is. What matters more is our FFP wiggle room.
 
....it's also worth noting that Celtic made a 7.5m loss last season. Despite over achieving with a UEFA Cup quarter final and increasing revenue.

They have modest debt of about 18m but, their business model has no way to seriously increase revenue beyond it's current record level, except player sales. They are and probably always will be a selling club. They buy players with the aim of selling at profit, this means they won't speculate beyond what they value, as this reduces profitability.

We can buy players knowing that we will never get a penny back, as long as they get us promoted.
 
BoroMart said:
I've read that. It's kind of irrelevant. If we pay half his wages and 1mill fee, it's still a 2mill investment from us. A million loan fee is still the equiv of 20k/week. Celtic don't pay that.
Click to expand...
Im merely posting it because you said categorically that we are paying all his wages and of course we now may not be. And as pointed out by others Celtic do not pay those kind of wages and frankly don't need to.
 
Zoophonic said:
Im merely posting it because you said categorically that we are paying all his wages and of course we now may not be. And as pointed out by others Celtic do not pay those kind of wages and frankly don't need to.
Click to expand...
If we are paying his wages through a loan fee or wages, it's kind of irrelevant, its accounting shenanigans. the end result is still the same
 
BoroMart said:
How exactly do Celtic create a strategy that increases their revenue? Their revenue is already at record levels and still losing money
Click to expand...
Celtic's revenue has dropped £30m in two seasons but still 3 times the size of ours - we aren't great shakes. We lost £35m last financial year. I have no idea what would happen if we don't make the Premier League. We have a strategy but a high risk one.
 
Zoophonic said:
Celtic's revenue has dropped £30m in two seasons but still 3 times the size of ours - we aren't great shakes. We lost £35m last financial year. I have no idea what would happen if we don't make the Premier League. We have a strategy but a high risk one.
Click to expand...
Our debt is serviced by Gibson, as long as that continues there is no problem. The issue occurs if he is no long the club owner.
 
The Balogun thing is semantics, we are still paying the same total for a half season loan, however they structure it. Either we pay him 100% , or we pay him 15% and the rest as a lump sum to Arsenal who then pay him the rest of his wages. Maybe there are budgeting reasons to structure it like that, or maybe the clubs just want to avoid the headlines that would follow, plus boro don't want to set a precedent by shattering there wage structure.
 
Willow said:
The Balogun thing is semantics, we are still paying the same total for a half season loan, however they structure it. Either we pay him 100% , or we pay him 15% and the rest as a lump sum to Arsenal who then pay him the rest of his wages. Maybe there are budgeting reasons to structure it like that, or maybe the clubs just want to avoid the headlines that would follow, plus boro don't want to set a precedent by shattering there wage structure.
Click to expand...
actually thinking about it, paying a 1mill loan fee is the same as 40k over 6months, so if we are paying wages on top of this even a portion, then it's a very expensive loan far beyond the cost of covering his wages.

Wonder if we are going to sell the Riverside to Bulkhaul and loan it back? Derby were allowed to do that and never punished for it
 
BoroMart said:
actually thinking about it, paying a 1mill loan fee is the same as 40k over 6months, so if we are paying wages on top of this even a portion, then it's a very expensive loan far beyond the cost of covering his wages.

Wonder if we are going to sell the Riverside to Bulkhaul and loan it back? Derby were allowed to do that and never punished for it
Click to expand...
EFL closed the loophole I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top