Tottenham Hotspur - Financials

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Spursidol said:
Thanks for this.

If we assume £25m for interest(but think it might be less) - that will be payable each year

But the repayment of capital will be when the debt matures - on average 23 years away. Would you expect there to be a clause requiring the company to put away the capital requirements in some sort of designated account so that they capital repayment is safeguarded for the bond holders - the capital repayment put aside might be say £40m pa.

Just trying to understand what financial constraints we have as we seem to be pretty conservative in our transfer dealings (not necessarily a bad thing) atm when last accounts showed £100m free cash generated and transfer fees for players are usually paid over the length of contract so Ndombele's fee last summer will be spread over 5 years etc..

Thoughts ?
Click to expand...

The 25m is both a capital and interest calculation ... £225m at 2.66% over 23 years would give a £275m return, that's roughly £25m a year, so that annual £25m is the total payment. THFC would account for that £25m a year and probably keep it in escrow or as cash on hand, tax implications would dictate the best method.

It's possible the £112m loan is short term say £40m a year for three years so that implies £65m debt payments 2020, 2021, 2022 and then just £25m per annum thereafter ... compare that to an increase in profits of over £100m and we are well ahead, don't forget we have sizeable cash reserves as well ...

Money is no longer our biggest issue, the issue is having too many players, we must move out six to get in three or four. If not then having those unwanted six players even on 80k a week sucks out 25m a year on assets we don't use ... that's what needs to be fixed, and where Poch/Levy failed last summer.
 
BF3 said:
Yes the Tottenham portion is a throw away line in the piece. Spurs went from no Europe to Europa consistently to CL contenders, basically.

Spurs seem to be the example all clubs use for how to progressively build up finances and results over a period of time.
Click to expand...

So outsiders praise the work we have done yet some supporters see it as unacceptable? Interesting how it differs so much, thanks for sharing the info.
 
John Thomas said:
I was born Spurs and I will die Spurs.
I've corrected your patronising bullshit for you. You know nothing about me.
Click to expand...

Selective support - the very worst kind - if you were born Spurs you should know that you support anything and everything to do with Spurs - picking and choosing which bits and which players you like? might I suggest you stick with football manager - anyone "born Spurs and I will die Spurs" knows there are no half-fans you're either all in or an entitled twat ... so which are you?

I've battered the Spammers over Paul Miller - Paul bloody Miller - you can't just play favourites piss or get off the pot.

What you know about ENIC wouldn't fit on a postage stamp, why not stay away from things you clearly don't understand rather than just constantly post anti Spurs drivel? What exactly do you a self proclaimed born Spurs and I will die Spurs fan get out of attacking our owners? a basement hard-on is that about it?
 
BangkokSpud said:
You owe me one house - I have had long PM's with a very regular who's a staunch well placed Woolwich fan, he posts loads on here mostly in a constructive way, but he also has the odd wind up ... his reasoning is that he can have better dialogue on here than on Woolwich sites which he says are all dull, he also posts on KUMB which he reckons has the most intelligent conversations on any site ... find that hard to believe.

I will ask him to PM you, obviously he won't want everyone knowing, you would never guess who it is I only spotted something in one of his posts where I knew the source he referenced, something only a journalist would know, that got us talking and he fessed up.

So how do I claim your house? are you near Murcia I have property their already can get my guy to come over and do the paperwork ...
Click to expand...
You're so boring
 
Spursidol said:

TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR LIMITED filing history - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity
beta.companieshouse.gov.uk beta.companieshouse.gov.uk

Spurs year ended 30 June 2018 accounts are now on Companies House web site.

I'll add a more complete commentary later, but a few initial comments :

1. Results Summary
Record revenues at £381m (last year £310m)

Profit before Interest and Tax £157m (£73m)

Retained Profit after Interest and Tax £113m (£63m) - our highest ever retained profit

Results include profits on sale of players of £73m (last year £40m) from the sale of Walker, Bentaleb, Wimmer, Fazio and N'Jie amongst others.

2. Revenue Analysis (last year in brackets):
Match Day £ 71m (£ 45m)
UEFA Prize Money £ 53m (£38m)
TV and Media £ 148m (£150m)
Commercial £ 109m (£76m)
Total £ 381m (£310m)
So the big increases were from match day income where Spurs benefited from the size of the stadium to attract record crowds and revenues. This will continues into the next year albeit with reduced crowds but including a few matches at NWHL with bigger premium/corporate areas which will help offset a little the reduced attendances at Wembley. The increase in UEFA money probably mainly reflects increased money in the competition. The biggest surprise is the increase in Commercial income of £33m, hadn't expected this increase until we were in NWHL. Augers well as we should get another big jump in 2019/20 from a full year at NWHL.

3. Wages
Spurs wage bill £147m is just above Everton and chasing pack but circa £100m behind Woolwich and other top 6 PL clubs. Spurs and their contractors pay the London Living Wage as their minimum pay to their staff.

DL remuneration £3m (down from £6m including bonuses last year).

4. Fixed Assets

Spend on property and equipment in the year was £493m (mainly on the stadium) to total just over £1 billion (£1.025 bn) at the year end - obviously there has been a further 9 months of spend since that date. The 'spend' in the year includes borrowing costs (interest) of £11.8m which has been capitalised

There is now a breakdown of cost between projects showing the cost of the training centre of £65m (before the hotel/players lodge) and Iillywhite House of £12m, most of the rest of the £1bn relates to the stadium (including equipment) cost.
Click to expand...
So if I am looking at these numbers correctly, and I'd like to believe I am, we can expect revenue to jump another £50m from increased matchday revenue and stadium naming rights for the 2019/20 season. Add another £50m for the 16 non-football events, and we are knocking on the door of half a billion in revenue a year, which would put us only behind the Manchester clubs.

:levylol:
 
Not sure if this is the right thread, but probably better than the Transfer thread where it will be lost.

Think it might be opportune to remind people of these rules about Premier League wages.

Premier League update their FFP rules

www.financialfairplay.co.uk www.financialfairplay.co.uk

A few years back the premier league introduced rules that a club can't increase their wage bill by more than £7m a season unless any other increase comes from an increase in Match Day or Commercial Income (not PL TV Money or PL prize money), or by "an averaged 3 year trading profit"

There is an additional separate measure where the club, instead of £7m a season. can have a £33m increase on the last 6 years, with any extra increase coming from Match Day or Commercial income or that 3 year trading profit.

This years results show a good increase in commercial revenues, and there is more to come over the next few years from catering at NWHL, NFL football, music gigs, boxing, e sports etc (not shirt deal as that is now fixed until 2023 or whatever), so Spurs can easily loosen the wages cap for the next few years - but we might start to flatline on commercial revenues in say 5 or 10 years so DL needs to do it whilst commercial revenues are rising.

Worth commenting that Woolwich are currently in the position where most of their long term commercial deals are no longer increasing so they are stuck with their current cap and cannot increase it - so only way out for them may be to sell some of their high earners such as Ozil and re-use the wages elsewhere. But they are in a mess and that is why I suspect DL will be wary of getting stuck in that situation and steadily increase wages whilst its easy for him to do so, And we were £100m in wages beneath Woolwich and other top 4 clubs so need to do so anyway.

So - great news to be a Spurs player willing to work hard and embrace Spurs (and Poch), or to be joining the club now !
 
r-u-s-x said:
Worldwide still not hit peak imo its why bigger clubs stopped it being equal split
Click to expand...
We'll see. I simply can't see it continuing to increase - it's a losing investment for broadcast platforms at the current rates which is why you're seeing major rights holders "lose" the rights to competitors who are paying over what all models forecast as profitable. In the US, Turner doubled what FOX had previously paid for CL rights when there's silly no way the value of the audience has doubled and FOX was losing money on the contract anyway. NBC, I've heard rumor, is losing money on their increased Premier League deal which makes sense considering ESPN didn't even bother submitting a bid as Disney overlord accountants had already sussed it as overvalued.

Where's the value in broadcasting football matches? There's very little advertising to be sold, certainly not enough to recoup the prices of these contracts. Most of it seems to be speculative investment on being able to bring in subscribers (increasingly difficult in a steal everything on the internet free-stream world) and being able to suck that audience into companion programming that can be more efficiently monetized.

Televised football is Bitcoin. I'm not saying it's going to crash and be worthless, but the market will correct, significantly, in the coming years. There's simply not the value in the product.
 


102m Euros so far - decent amount but in today's market only enough to buy 2 players, but not pay wages !

My guess however is that the exposure Spurs will get from the CL final appearance will add zillions to that amount (and maybe get that bid Stadium Naming Rights deal over the line) plus a few younger hungry players out there might be thinking they'd like to join that 'up and coming side' rather than some of the more established sides such as Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, Manchester United etc, providing of course the wages are ok.

So its all good.

And did I mention that with the extra UEFA Coefficient points our 5 year average is now the same as ManU ?
 
Last edited:
Worth summarising where we are post the CL final, putting a few financials in comparison with other PL clubs.

1. TV from PL and Europe

Spurs
PL. 145
CL. 90
total. £ 235m. ( £36m more than last season)

Other Clubs total TV money :
Liverpool. 251m
Mancity. 233m
Manu. 226m
Chelsea 185m. ( Shows difference between CL and EL)
Woolwich. 174m
Everton. 129m. ( Shows why Europe is so important)

So Spurs have the same level (finally ) as Liverpool ManCity and Manu of TV money...and ahead of Chelsea and Woolwich.

And £100m or more above clubs not in Europe !

Next season hopefully Manu and Chelsea will swap round whilst we continue to be in top 4 TV revenue earners.

2. Effect of UEFA coefficient on TV Revenues

Included in TV revenues is a pot of money divided between CL clubs based upon the 10 year UEFA coefficient. The TV revenues above include the following amounts ( in euros)

Manu. (5th position) 31m
Mancity (14th). 24.4m
Liverpool (15th). 23.3 m
Spurs (25th). 15.5m

So we have some way to catch up. Next season if we have a decent CL run to say quarter finals or beyond we will get into the state 15th to 20th type position do start to catch up with the other top clubs. But as it's a 10 year coefficient we'll need a few seasons of good performances to get into too 10 Uefa coefficient (10 year) which is solely used to divi up t. Revenues ( the 5 yesr one determined which pot we end in)

All figures courtesy of the Swiss ramble
 
Stanley said:
Question: looking at a prediction for next year

Revenue will increase because 19/20 will mean a full season of using our stadium (matchday income increase) but a decrease in CL money if we don’t reach the final again/ don’t qualify for next season

Do you feel this would mean an overall increase or decrease in revenue?
Click to expand...

The numbers produced by the new stadium will more than compensate for the loss of a couple of CL rounds this season, we will likely play more home cup games anyway. For 20/21 if we miss out entirely on Europe then that could see us take an 80m hit ... Woolwich have seen how much that hurts ...

On the plus side Barca, Manu Utd, PSG have all seen massive increases through sponsorship rather than on-field performance, DL is holding out for some simply eye-watering numbers for us ... if he can pull any or all of these deals together over the next couple of years 600m turnover is certainly not impossible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom