Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Saints have revealed their first profit since the takeover of Markus Liebherr in 2009. http://dailyecho.co.uk/sport/11886270.Southampton_to_reveal_first_profit_since_administration/ Now a dead link, but the Echo had a piece up earlier - the headline figures... PROFIT: £33.4m (after tax) - £6.5m loss in 2012/13 REVENUE: £106.1m - up by 52.2% from £71.8m in 2012/13 COMMERCIAL INCOME: £8.3m - up from £6.7m in 2012/13 MATCHDAY INCOME £7.1m - up from £6.8m in 2012/13 TOTAL WAGE BILL: £55.2m - up from £41.4m in 2012/13 TOTAL STAFF NUMBER: 282 - up from 230 in 2012/13 STAPLEWOOD: Investment to date in excess of £25m - when new plans for the extension are complete, the final figure will be £38m LOANS: Katharina Liebherr provided a loan of £14.7m in the financial year The club also held a loan facility, secured against her estate for £14.5m. Katharina Liebherr injected a further loan of £20m into the club during the summer of 2014. Undoubtedly more to come when the report is released - but that's the headline stuff from what was put up, and now taken down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Anybody who still doubts Katherina's commitment should take note. That's an awful lot of money to put at risk however wealthy they make be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 If only we were 'fan owned' and debt free like the Skates, eh ? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 is this up till 31 March Last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 28 March, 2015 is this up till 31 March Last year? From 1st of April 2013 to 1st of April 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Could make a big dent in that wage bill if you subtract Osvaldo & Gaston's wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Could make a big dent in that wage bill if you subtract Osvaldo & Gaston's wages. throw in the significant money made in the summer sales....surely in the black on that front. wages probably gone up though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goatboy Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 I would hazard a guess (from what I've heard;)) that the first KL loan has been paid back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Saints have revealed their first profit since the takeover of Markus Liebherr in 2009. http://dailyecho.co.uk/sport/11886270.Southampton_to_reveal_first_profit_since_administration/ Now a dead link, but the Echo had a piece up earlier - the headline figures... PROFIT: £33.4m (after tax) - £6.5m loss in 2012/13 REVENUE: £106.1m - up by 52.2% from £71.8m in 2012/13 COMMERCIAL INCOME: £8.3m - up from £6.7m in 2012/13 MATCHDAY INCOME £7.1m - up from £6.8m in 2012/13 TOTAL WAGE BILL: £55.2m - up from £41.4m in 2012/13 TOTAL STAFF NUMBER: 282 - up from 230 in 2012/13 STAPLEWOOD: Investment to date in excess of £25m - when new plans for the extension are complete, the final figure will be £38m LOANS: Katharina Liebherr provided a loan of £14.7m in the financial year The club also held a loan facility, secured against her estate for £14.5m. Katharina Liebherr injected a further loan of £20m into the club during the summer of 2014. Undoubtedly more to come when the report is released - but that's the headline stuff from what was put up, and now taken down... So what happened? Did the Echo break a news embargo? These numbers would move Southampton from 25th on the Deloitte Money List to 21st. It also means that my January 2015 guess at Southampton's earnings last year (108 million pounds) was more accurate that Deloitte's guess. That should worry Deloitte since I did only a little research and they did a lot. http://redsloscf.blogspot.com/2015/01/financial-fair-play-friend-or-foe.html Does anyone know when the actual financials are going to be officially published? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 28 March, 2015 So what happened? Did the Echo break a news embargo? These numbers would move Southampton from 25th on the Deloitte Money List to 21st. It also means that my January 2015 guess at Southampton's earnings last year (108 million pounds) was more accurate that Deloitte's guess. That should worry Deloitte since I did only a little research and they did a lot. http://redsloscf.blogspot.com/2015/01/financial-fair-play-friend-or-foe.html Does anyone know when the actual financials are going to be officially published? I would assume in the coming days. The Echo's URL still exists, it just sends you into a dead end if you click it. Suggests they jumped the gun, or meant to schedule it to upload at a certain time and something went wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Anybody who still doubts Katherina's commitment should take note. That's an awful lot of money to put at risk however wealthy they make be. Don't know what point you are trying to make, but really its peanuts, less than 2%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 So when we were told there was no money to buy a striker in January (can't remember by who) it was because the board didn't want to rather than no funds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 So when we were told there was no money to buy a striker in January (can't remember by who) it was because the board didn't want to rather than no funds? When were we told there was no money to buy a striker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 (edited) So when we were told there was no money to buy a striker in January (can't remember by who) it was because the board didn't want to rather than no funds? To know that you'd have to analyse the transfers before and after the 30th June which is when the financial year ends for Saints. Work out how much of the profit was due to player sales before player purchases and all that stuff. Don't think we sold many before 30th June though. We sold Shaw to Utd on 27/6 and Lambert to Liverpool end of May beginning of June . Just those 2 transfer fees would account for the 33 million £ profit at 30/6 I think. Without those incoming fees (if they figure in the 2013/14 accounts) then we made no profit at all. Edited 28 March, 2015 by Window Cleaner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 When were we told there was no money to buy a striker? 1 of the iks's, k willy something?? Might've got my wires crossed though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 So when we were told there was no money to buy a striker in January (can't remember by who) it was because the board didn't want to rather than no funds? You'd need to look at the next year's figures to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 When were we told there was no money to buy a striker? Billy said it once and certain gullible mugs took it as gospel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Well considering nearly everything he said has been correct isn't it fair enough to take it as gospel? No need to be calling people mugs either cupcake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Well considering nearly everything he said has been correct isn't it fair enough to take it as gospel? No need to be calling people mugs either cupcake. Take it as gospel if you're a mug treacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 £33m profit is pretty impressive. Shame Cortese could not work with KL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 To know that you'd have to analyse the transfers before and after the 30th June which is when the financial year ends for Saints. Work out how much of the profit was due to player sales before player purchases and all that stuff. Don't think we sold many before 30th June though. We sold Shaw to Utd on 27/6 and Lambert to Liverpool end of May beginning of June . Just those 2 transfer fees would account for the 33 million £ profit at 30/6 I think. Without those incoming fees (if they figure in the 2013/14 accounts) then we made no profit at all. Except these figures are up till april 2014 aren't they, so not including the transfer fees for last summer...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Except these figures are up till april 2014 aren't they, so not including the transfer fees for last summer...? Why do you believe these are through April 2014. Southampton's fiscal year runs through June and last year those results were published at the end of March. http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26813363 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 1 of the iks's, k willy something?? Might've got my wires crossed though. Fair enough. ITK as often as not either full of it, have access to fragments, or utterly incapable of applying perspective to information they have (ie Crab Lungs gullible parroting of the whining of a pig sh it thick footballers temper tantrums). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Reasonably confident that these accounts show that this summer will be quiet unless we get big money in for a few players again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwichsaint Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Reasonably confident that these accounts show that this summer will be quiet unless we get big money in for a few players again. Doesn't 'new' telly money kick in next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lickierambert Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Reasonably confident that these accounts show that this summer will be quiet unless we get big money in for a few players again. It doesn't include our profit from last summer's transfer window. With Clyne and Schneiderlin set to leave, I'd say we'll spend reasonably big again this summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 From 1st of April 2013 to 1st of April 2014. which also means the £91 million income from player sales...isn't included and will come into this years figs....WOW ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 28 March, 2015 which also means the £91 million income from player sales...isn't included and will come into this years figs....WOW ! IF I have got that right, which as suggested above, may not be the case. I was basing it on the financial year - but may be different for Saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Doesn't 'new' telly money kick in next season? Season after. 2016 onwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 IF I have got that right, which as suggested above, may not be the case. I was basing it on the financial year - but may be different for Saints. Reading the above BBC article suggest that the results released today are for year ending the 30th Jun 2014. So will include some of the player trading from last summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 28 March, 2015 AUDIO: Gareth Rogers talks to Adam Blackmore about the club's finances - https://audioboom.com/boos/3033653-exclusive-saintsfc-chief-exec-gareth-rogers-tells-bigadamsport-what-s-most-pleasing-about-2013-14-finances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Doesn't 'new' telly money kick in next season? No, the recently announced new TV deal is for these seasons... 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucks Saint Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Great results. Surprised at the staff number increase though. A few in the coaching set up, and perhaps wider network of scouts etc, but that does not account for many surely? Staplewood preparations may have involved a few? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 28 March, 2015 Author Share Posted 28 March, 2015 BBC REPORT: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32090724 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 28 March, 2015 Share Posted 28 March, 2015 Doesn't 'new' telly money kick in next season? No, the season after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintVanderbilt Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 Southampton's new training ground is expected to cost £38m despite an initial estimate of £15m Can anyone explain why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 (edited) Southampton's new training ground is expected to cost £38m despite an initial estimate of £15m Can anyone explain why? It is now significantly larger in scale than the original plans and includes many things the £15m project didn't include. Compared to the original £15m plan; the £38m plan has more buildings on the site, a bigger pavilion building and also they have expanded the site to the south into farmers fields with more pitches. Edited 29 March, 2015 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 Aren't football finances not measured across fiscal year? Could be wrong but I thought they included some of the close season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 From 1st of April 2013 to 1st of April 2014. It is until end of June 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 Reading the above BBC article suggest that the results released today are for year ending the 30th Jun 2014. So will include some of the player trading from last summer. Sorry missed this. Says £32 m included. The balance of £50m (we only got £82 m for the 5 players) will be in next year's accounts. However we spent £63m which will also be included, so net spend of £13m so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 In my googling to find more information about the financials, I ran across this (now) interestingly, ironic blog post: http://oxfordstudent.com/2014/07/30/what-on-earth-is-going-on-at-southampton-fc/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 The BBC and the Echo report that our salary spend went from £41.4 million in 2012-2013 to £55.2 million in 2013-2014. However, the £41.4 was not the actual salary cost in 2012-2013 because social security and other pension costs must be counted too. That total was £47.1 million for 2012-2013. It is not clear whether the media knows this. As result, it is not clear (at least to me) whether the £55.2 should be compared to the £41.4 or the £47.1. If the later, the growth in salaries is significantly less. If the former, our actual salary costs last season would be significantly higher--around £62.8 by straight extrapolation. According to the Echo we have increased permanent staff by 52 which would mean that those people cost an average of either £302K per year or £156 per year. Even allowing for the fact that some employees received raises and some of our new players were well paid, the lower figure seems much more likely. But maybe not--Alderweireld's salary would account for around £60K of the difference all by itself. We shall see shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lickierambert Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 BBC REPORT: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32090724 Anyone else find that a slightly narky headline considering the content of the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 The BBC and the Echo report that our salary spend went from £41.4 million in 2012-2013 to £55.2 million in 2013-2014. However, the £41.4 was not the actual salary cost in 2012-2013 because social security and other pension costs must be counted too. That total was £47.1 million for 2012-2013. It is not clear whether the media knows this. As result, it is not clear (at least to me) whether the £55.2 should be compared to the £41.4 or the £47.1. If the later, the growth in salaries is significantly less. If the former, our actual salary costs last season would be significantly higher--around £62.8 by straight extrapolation. According to the Echo we have increased permanent staff by 52 which would mean that those people cost an average of either £302K per year or £156 per year. Even allowing for the fact that some employees received raises and some of our new players were well paid, the lower figure seems much more likely. But maybe not--Alderweireld's salary would account for around £60K of the difference all by itself. We shall see shortly. You need to bear in mind that the accounts only reflect last seasons financials and anything 'this season' up to the end of June. Any transfer activity after 30th June won't be reflected in the accounts. Our Chairman has already said the wage bill has gone up from last season so it will be interesting to see what it is and how much of the debt has been paid back as well. I expect the money owed in transfers to be drastically reduced as well. Next year I also expect to see an increase in income purely from an improved league position and us being on TV many more times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 What is the total debt figure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 you would think that the summer just gone has set us up nicely financially. player transactions alone we were what? £20m in the black?? throw in the £80m+ TV money.. surely, that should clear a great deal/put us in a nice position... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 (edited) £33m profit is pretty impressive. Shame Cortese could not work with KL. "What we can't shy away from is there is still Significant debt sitting on the club because of what been built and the past decisions the club has made and we Cannot get away from that It is absolutely there and we need to have some strong disciplines, strong governance and strong management to bring that debt down. We don't want to be carrying that sort of debt" That's why they couldn't work together pal Edited 29 March, 2015 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 "What we can't shy away from is their is still Significant debt sitting on the club because of what been built and the past decisions the club has made and we Cannot get away from that It absolutely there and we need to have some strong disciplines, strong governance and strong management to bring that debt down. We don't want to be carrying that sort of debt" That's why they couldn't work together pal You say significant debt, Gareth Rogers, some of us say significant dreams and ambition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 You need to bear in mind that the accounts only reflect last seasons financials and anything 'this season' up to the end of June. Any transfer activity after 30th June won't be reflected in the accounts. Our Chairman has already said the wage bill has gone up from last season so it will be interesting to see what it is and how much of the debt has been paid back as well. I expect the money owed in transfers to be drastically reduced as well. Next year I also expect to see an increase in income purely from an improved league position and us being on TV many more times. I understand. We are comparing 2012-2013 with 2013-2014. The currents season's financial results are a year away from being announced. Most of the increase in gross receipts between 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 will be due to finishing 8 instead of 14 and to the much larger TV contract. That part of our income will not grow much at all during this season since our league position will only increase from 1 to 4 places and I don't think we were on national TV more than the minimum amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 29 March, 2015 Share Posted 29 March, 2015 At least those bellends who insisted Kat was asset stripping or using the club for her handbag fund have been shut up. Also it does appear that as more and more comes out getting shot of nick nack was the best thing she could have done. The fact that she has lent the club £20m to replace the vibrac loan suggests she either wasn't aware or didn't approve that his loan was taken out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now