Much to your disappointment I haven't for once thought you were an employee of the club - no person associated with us would ever come out with the level of nonsense or spin that you do. What I think you are is someone devoid of critical thinking, someone who believes following Guardian journalists on twitter makes them informed and someone who likes to name drop scouts and youth coaches to give the impression that they have connections at the club. It's all feelings over facts with you which is why it is so easy to take you apart.
What we do know is that our revenue is already close to £400 million ( it's was £379 million in the last set of accounts) so don't present this as something new. We like most other clubs have increased turnover in the majority of seasons purely due in large parts to the rampant inflation in the broadcast revenues. The club has been in the CL for 4 seasons, has been in a 60,000 + stadium for 2 seasons and in that time our market spend has dramatically reduced but according to Guido this is suddenly going to be reversed at a time when there is no new naming rights deal in place, when the club has entered into a 15 year deal with Nike which by market standards is a poor deal ( which is the Trust brought this up with the club) and where we have £600 million worth of loans that have to be repaid by 2022. The notion that because the stadium is built that our period of austerity is automatically over is just laughable. And the suggestion that the solution is that we get to the CL semi final/final each season is even more so because that is what you are saying because Liverpool who got to the final last season generated £68 million.
We have already increased our payroll - it's moved with increases in our turnover and will most likely always operate at the same ratio as before at around 50-60% of turnover). And no no doubt as the broadcast revenues continue to inflate it will increase again. Listening to you is like listening to an Woolwich supporter talk about the Emirates in 2004 whilst completely ignoring the arrival of the billionaire model. The inflation in broadcast revenues has massively eroded the value of the stadium model because in a market where Gylfi Sigurðsson commands a transfer fee of £45 million what major difference does £50-60 extra matchday revenue provide us capacity wise? The simple fact is that prior to the new stadium and CL revenues we we the 6th biggest club by turnover in the league and with these we will still be that.
I love these meaninglessly buzz words, quantify this 'new level' or this 'new operating environment'. The move to Wembley gave us an indication of our new revenues stream. Is a failure to make a single signing over 2 windows indicative of this new environment? You would think after Woolwich's stadium move we wouldn't be open to blindingly accepting every narrative coming from a board. I have always liked Levy but I knew he was lying through his teeth when he said that the stadium wouldn't effect our market capacity and that there would be separate budgets. No doubt you naive to think that the rationale behind the stadium move was to increase revenue side to benefit the playing side. Anyone with any semblance of intelligence would know that Joe Lewis has no love of football and the target for ENIC was to maximize the return on their investment through developing our infrastructure.
I mention McDermott and Steve Hitchin means I'm trying to make it look like I've got connections at the club!?! Christ alive, what I take from that is you have never heard of them before. FWIW McDermott isn't just an Academy Coach, he heads it up, he's a very important part of the club. Hitchin is our Chief Scout, but what he's been scouting for the past 2 seasons I don't know, I guess we'll see what he's about this summer. You have on several occasions made references to me being PR for Spurs it's the very reason I mentioned it, you idiot.
I know exactly what our revenues are, yet another personal dig you made about only a few days ago was that I have a handle on them!!
I'm NOT presenting the fact we have revenues of near £400m as "new" or a sudden flick of a switch ligt bulb revelation, what on earth gives you that impression? I didn't say our period of austerity is over, that term I guess is subjective dependant on who you speak to and what it means given their expectations of what the club spend and how they generate revenue. What I've said is we will remain a self-financing club, NOTHING will change this (unless we are bought by a new regime that does an Abramovic or City), so we will continue to run the club based on the revenue we generate. I haven't even mentioned the Nike deal as good or bad. I haven't even mentioned stadium naming rights, just on the revenue we now can generate now we are in the new stadium. This revenue includes TV, Commercial, Matchday, CL, etc. That's it.
We have debts, I've acknowledged this but the way we are geared shows that we are in excellent fiscal shape (the debt is half the valuation of the assets and our EBITDA which is considered a proxy for cash operating profit, increased from £122m to £159m, 2nd highest in the league only behind Utd the kings of cash, oh and twice as much a Woolwich!!).
Yes, we had the 6th biggest revenue in the league prior to the stadium being built and YES it is likely we will continue to be the 6th highest revenue producer once it's built actually (currently, not from 2018 accounts) we are ahead of Woolwich making us in 5th but that semantics! BUT the gap is down significantly to Chelsea (approx £40m) and Liverpool (£50m) too. There will be fluctuations against these three teams because the CL places are significant as one gets CL rev whilst another doesn't (that could equate to a £100m swing but has become complex to predict given rejigging of how revenues are now shared). But we are now at the same approx revenue levels as these clubs having been £100-£150m off them for decades, huge difference.
To suggest moving away from Old WHL doesn't give us an impact is utter nonsense as match day income rose £26m (57%), we don't receive concessions at Wembley so I've heard (that may be bollocks but it's the word on the streets say it's so) and we had to pay rent of £12-£15m pa + the ticket prices were less at Wembley than WHL. It's not an over-ambitious thing to say that our match day income will be similar to what Woolwich generate now we are back home, that will be £100m pa from a maxed out £45m - That's double and represents CL level of extra revenue generation!
We haven't operated with these revenues before, revenues comparable to these clubs, that's what is different, that is highly significant. We are now swimming in a different pond.
Our revenue has increased across every single metric (In total a massive 81% (£171m) driven by success on the pitch. Most of the increase has come from broadcasting £90m, but also healthy growth in commercial £50m & match day £30m this matchday, so as mentioned above now we are home there will be further increased on matchday to probably take up to £100m. Revenue growth is the highest of the “Big Six”, both in absolute and percentage terms!
Point of fact, you are completely WRONG about wages, yes they rose (21%) BUT we CUT our wages to turnover from 41% to 39%, a full 11% bellow Utd who had previously had the lowest!! This will no doubt show further increase as a number of new contracts were awarded last year, also I've already stated almost certainly key players we want to keep will no doubt have new deals negotiated. The trend of wage increase will continue to be up but inline of our revenue growth, for now, remains to be seen, no doubt once our revenues stabilize/flatline somewhat wage percentage of turnover will no doubt go up. But for now, you couldn’t be any more wrong.
I haven't for a single moment suggested that ENIC doesn't want to make a return on investment, but now you have OF CAUSE THEY DO YOU FUCKING IDIOT! We didn't buy any players because of a number of most likely factors, Poch choices, availability and a new Stadium overrunning and as a consequence costs going through the roof for every day, it's delayed. I've no idea if it's one of these in the singular or the accumulation of all of them together, only Levy and Poch do.
Now Fuck Off!