Newcastle United Finances Ending 30th June 2011

[Guest Your Name Here]

Lending the money means he doesn't have to sell his shares to get his money back. As a fan I'd far rather he got paid back when he sells up and the money go to fund the team instead. But he's obviously entitled to have his money back at the end of the day, he gave it to the club to fund its operating losses in the first place.

Aye, but a fair whack of those losses where down to him creating the instability that saw us relegated, and the rest he inherited on the back of not undertaking Due diligence? Don't see why the supporters should cover his mistakes

Thats like saying the Greeks shouldnt pay their debts back because their politicians cooked the books. He's a fucking idiot for not knowing the debt was there, its still our debt though.

It would be if Greece had lent itself €206b to cover its mistakes. Edited March 9, 2012 by Your Name Here

[Baggio 0]

Commercial was £15.7 million apparently.

[Happy Face 29]

That commercial drop-off is what I was wondering about earlier.

What figure you looking at?

 

Commercial was £15.7 million apparently.

 

Turnover = £88.4m (actual)

 

Matchday = £24.3m (actual)

 

Media = £53.9

I based it on what Villa got (see the latest story on Swiss Ramble) in the absence of anything better. I've since been pointed to this so the bare minimum media money is £47.3m, but you generally get a few million from other sources onj top of the PL total.

 

Commercial = £16.8m max based on that PL distribution and the other amounts above. £15.7 could be about right. Source?

[PaddockLad 15370]

Newcastle chief Derek Llambias has sensationally admitted that the club's owner Mike Ashley still calls their home ground St James’ Park - and says the fans should too.

But the Toon have vowed to press ahead with finding a new naming-rights sponsor for the historic 52,000-seat stadium, explaining that it will help fund a top-class new signing every season.

Llambias revealed the club's latest financial figures for the year to June 2011 on Thursday - and the numbers show Newcastle are in a healthy, virtual-break-even position at a time when many of their rivals are losing tens of millions.

Despite that encouraging news, managing director Llambias insists the only way for Newcastle to compete at the sharp end of the Premier League is to up their “commercial revenue”, which is lagging milllions of pounds each year behind clubs they aim to compete with, such as Spurs, Chelsea, the two Manchester teams and Liverpool.

In his first ever interview, Llambias has told the Mirror he and Ashley are not “riding roughshod” over the club’s history and traditions, and stated they will always be there and owned by the fans.

The ground was officially renamed the Sports Direct Arena in November, sparking fury from many fans.

But Llambias said: “Do you think me and Mike call it the Sports Direct Arena? We call it St James’ Park, because it is St James’ Park.

“The naming rights is such a passionate thing. It’s not about being disrespectful or taking away the tradition or the history of the club - it’s about trying to get another Yohan Cabaye out there on the pitch. That’s how we see it.

"To optimise our commercial side, we needed to get that in there - other clubs do it.

“We’ve had to take the criticism on the nose. We’re not riding roughshod over people’s love. People come to see our players on the pitch. It’s about us, the fans, the manager, the players and the region - it’s an emotional thing.

“If we wanted to ride roughshod, we’d just put the ticket prices up.

"That’s not happening.

"We know we’ve got a huge responsibility, and we know there’s a lot of emotion involved and we are emotional people, too.

"We are not being disrespectful. Mike and I understand and feel for it.

“The only area of income we can really build is the commercial revenue. We don’t want to put ticket prices up. We have a 10-year ticket deal and now we’ve announced a nine-year deal.

"We’ve increased our family area to 7,500 and for an adult and a kid it’s 500 quid a year.

"We’re trying to fill the stadium at a price we can afford. We can’t have it half-full, because we’d lose that spirit.

“There are only a few ways to increase our income. We know the naming rights is contentious, but that income is something we need.”

Newcastle earn £15million a year from commercial deals such as shirt sponsorships and retailing.

In comparison, Spurs bank £50m, Chelsea £45m, Manchester City £54m and Manchester United a staggering £103m.

Llambias added: “Could our stadium be the O2 Arena of the north? I think it could.

"It’s already a cathedral, but it’s dead in the summer. There are things the club can expand on, but we are limited.

“Sports Direct is showcasing the naming rights, but without Sports Direct we would not be in Newcastle. That is the business that gives Mike the power to do what we’re doing, and the power to put £270m of his own money behind the football club.

“We’d have loved someone to come along and say, 'We’re going to give you the money for the shirt sponsorship and the stadium.'

“If we lose on a Saturday, my wife just leaves me alone in the next room and Mike sulks in his house. That’s what happens when you get involved in something when you start to run and love a team and all the functions of our club.

"We just feel it’s for the good of our club going forward and it could give us another player.”

Newcastle sources admit the best scenario may be for a business such as their existing shirt sponsors Virgin Money - who are based in the city - to buy the naming rights... and then rename the ground St James’ Park.

“What a PR coup that would be,” a club source said.

EXCLUSIVE: Without Mike Ashley, Toon would be like Portsmouth - only worse! claims Llambias

***

DEREK LLAMBIAS ON...

The possibility of Mike Ashley selling the club: “We’re not doing this to sell up. The reality is that if someone comes up with a chunk of money, I’d have to put it to Mike and he would have to consider it. Would we sell it to someone who couldn’t afford it? No. Would we sell it cheap? No, why would we? We’ve put the money in, done the work and now we may see the upside of what we’re trying to grow."

 

Toon manager Alan Pardew: “Alan was the right combination of what we’re looking for and understands where we’re going. He’s a good guy, good with the media, good with the players. Tactically he’s very good - he doesn’t get it right all of the time, but nobody does. And we know how he’s going to play before a game and we like that with Alan. He’s got a passion and he’s settled down in the North-East really well and loves it.

 

His relationship with the Toon Army: “We do engage with fans. We met a guy who drives from Bournemouth for every home match, so we invited him to be our guest and for them to ask anything they wanted. We’ve done it for other fans we’ve met in restaurants. Sometimes they’re still critical, but we just say, ‘Come on, just ask us’. At the end of the day, when they’ve met us, it gets them thinking."

 

New faces for next season: “We have targets for the summer, and we’re not in a position of having to beg. People are saying, ‘Ah Newcastle. Of course we want to talk to you’. We do a brilliant video presentation - very sharp, it is great - and it opens eyes to what the club, the fans and the city are all about.

Selling members of the current squad: “We’ll be losing one or two names this summer, but that’ll be regenerated back into the squad. Alan’s plan is to get a smaller squad, with better quality - so the bench is better. That’s our aim over the next two years. We can’t do it all this summer - we’re not sure what the market will be like this summer when we’re trading. We will lose some faces. For instance, Tiote has been with us a year and a half. He is out there. People know he’s a good player. He’s proven in the Premier League, he’s not picking up as many yellow cards, he’s learning. How are we going to stop a big club from coming in for him? It’ll be very hard. One thing in our favour is that we now have a very good side and that might encourage the player to stay. But if someone knocks on the door and says they want this or that money, the reality may be that we have to trade."

 

Selling Andy Carroll: “Sometimes you can’t hold a player back from moving. It’s in their best interests. Take, for example, Andy, and look what he’s getting [at Liverpool], several times the wages [he was on at Newcastle]. The only person who said no to that deal was Mike. The reality is, it’s a risk, it’s January, can we replace him? We couldn’t. It was a risk."

 

Paying £9million to sign new No9 Papiss Cisse: “We spend a long, long time identifying our targets and he was our number one choice. But at first we couldn't afford the price or the salary so we moved on to the next one, which was [sochaux striker Modibo] Maiga (who ended up failing his Toon medical). January came and nobody knew Cisse was happening, which is how we like it - those are our most successful deals, without the interference, in terms of upping the price or someone coming in at the last minute."

 

Securing centre-back and skipper Fabricio Coloccini and goalkeeper Tim Krul on long-term contracts last week: “We’ve made a big commitment to Colo and Tim. People asked why we hadn’t done the deal, but it took a long time - it didn’t happen overnight. Coloccini’s took a year. We never want to find ourselves in a position where we lose somebody like we did Jose Enrique [who was sold to Liverpool in the summer after failing to agree a new contract]. We didn’t want to lose somebody of his value, or the team building that Coloccini gives you as captain. Colo doesn’t fit our profile in that we wouldn’t bring a 29-year-old in, but he’s here and he’s proven. He’s an all-round top pro and will finish his pro career here at 34. He’s like a Giggs or a Scholes - a solid player and you can build around him. Krul is up and coming and can be anything. We’ve got him on a five and a half year deal and we’re very happy."

 

His tough negotiating policy: “If we did it for one person’s wages, we’d have to do it for the next and then we’d get a reputation. At the moment, players and agents know that our first offer is very close to the final offer. Once it’s off the table, it’s off the table and it only goes down. It’s never up, it’s always lower. There are more football players than there are clubs. The manager has his targets and we just move on."

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Newcastle-exclusive-Owner-Mike-Ashley-and-MD-Derek-Llambias-still-call-stadium-St-James-Park-despite-renaming-it-in-sponsorship-deal-and-say-fans-should-do-so-too-article875683.html

[The Fish 9576]

New faces for next season: “We have targets for the summer, and we’re not in a position of having to beg. People are saying, ‘Ah Newcastle. Of course we want to talk to you’. We do a brilliant video presentation - very sharp, it is great - and it opens eyes to what the club, the fans and the city are all about.

 

Is it just me or does this sound a bit odd. It's almost like Bobby banging on about the wooden doors, but in a far less likeable way.

 

Isn't this bit:

 

For instance, Tiote has been with us a year and a half. He is out there. People know he’s a good player. He’s proven in the Premier League, he’s not picking up as many yellow cards, he’s learning. How are we going to stop a big club from coming in for him? It’ll be very hard. One thing in our favour is that we now have a very good side and that might encourage the player to stay. But if someone knocks on the door and says they want this or that money, the reality may be that we have to trade."

 

Out of whack with this bit:

Securing centre-back and skipper Fabricio Coloccini and goalkeeper Tim Krul on long-term contracts last week: “We’ve made a big commitment to Colo and Tim. People asked why we hadn’t done the deal, but it took a long time - it didn’t happen overnight. Coloccini’s took a year. We never want to find ourselves in a position where we lose somebody like we did Jose Enrique [who was sold to Liverpool in the summer after failing to agree a new contract]. We didn’t want to lose somebody of his value, or the team building that Coloccini gives you as captain. Colo doesn’t fit our profile in that we wouldn’t bring a 29-year-old in, but he’s here and he’s proven. He’s an all-round top pro and will finish his pro career here at 34. He’s like a Giggs or a Scholes - a solid player and you can build around him. Krul is up and coming and can be anything. We’ve got him on a five and a half year deal and we’re very happy."

 

I reckon what he means is that they don't want to lose anybody, but Tiote is clearly a good player and that if Cheik attracts Carroll-Money, he'll be off. I just think he's a bit awkward and easily lead into idiocy by the media.

[Toonpack 7416]

I Like this interview bit:

 

“We would like to see deferred transfer payments phased out, so that you just pay for a transfer over a year.

 

"Why pay for it over five years? Most do it.

 

"We prefer to pay it over a short period of time. This was put to the Premer League board in 2010 and was rejected by everybody.

 

"We are saying it should be discussed. You shouldn’t be spending money you haven’t got. It’s not the right way to behave.

 

“And look at the taxman. Why is the taxman giving clubs so long to pay their tax bills? For instance, VAT - it should be paid on the dot. It’s a crazy way of running a business.

 

“And is the creditors rule right in football? Footballers are getting paid, but the local tradesmen who have done work for the club aren’t and it is costing jobs.”

 

If there's a level playing field (man-up UEFA!!!) and HMRC win their football creditors challenge (as they fucking should), there's a much more level playing field and our "size" will be of massive advantage.

 

Maybe Ashley's going to make himself as popular in football as he is in "the city". Rock the boat FCB rock the boat.

[ewerk 27671]

HMRC winning the football creditors challenge would be fantastic for the stability of British football clubs.

[Happy Face 29]

"We are saying it should be discussed. You shouldn’t be spending money you haven’t got. It’s not the right way to behave.

 

It's a bit rich when we have the 4th highest debt in the league.

 

I think what he means to say is you shouldn't spend what you can't borrow.

[ewerk 27671]

"We are saying it should be discussed. You shouldn’t be spending money you haven’t got. It’s not the right way to behave.

 

It's a bit rich when we have the 4th highest debt in the league.

 

I think what he means to say is you shouldn't spend what you can't borrow.

 

[Toonpack 7416]

HMRC winning the football creditors challenge would be fantastic for the stability of British football clubs.

 

There'd be some significant reeling in all over the place, we've already done our slash and burn and are well placed.

 

Evidently rule doesn't apply outside of England, one of the reasons for the shenanigans at Rangers with the players taking pay cuts.

[Toonpack 7416]

"We are saying it should be discussed. You shouldn’t be spending money you haven’t got. It’s not the right way to behave.

 

It's a bit rich when we have the 4th highest debt in the league.

 

I think what he means to say is you shouldn't spend what you can't borrow.

 

Hardly the same thing tbh.

[Happy Face 29]

"We are saying it should be discussed. You shouldn’t be spending money you haven’t got. It’s not the right way to behave.

 

It's a bit rich when we have the 4th highest debt in the league.

 

I think what he means to say is you shouldn't spend what you can't borrow.

 

 

[ewerk 27671]

At what point over the last four years could you have accused Mike Ashley of overspending on players?

[Happy Face 29]

At what point over the last four years could you have accused Mike Ashley of overspending on players?

 

You can't, that's the shame of it. He's the worst of both worlds.

 

Shepherd got dogs abuse for running up £76m debt (off me too), but at least it went onto the pitch.

 

Ashley has run the debt up to £140m, and none of it's been seen on the pitch, if anything it's taken off the pitch so the debt doesn't spiral further.

 

All this cock sucking going on is for him having taken 5 years to get us back where we were in 2007, with several figures much worse...the ones it takes business acumen to maximise, as opposed to the TV money that lands in your lap as long as the team perform.

 

2007 v 2011

 

Turnover £87m v £88m

Wages £59m v £54m

Commercial £28m v £16m

Match £34m v £24m

TV £26m v £47m

 

What he's done well, is get us into this position with just an annual loss of £3m, rather than a loss of £26m which we were seeing then. all credit to him there.

 

I'll gladly go down on the fucker and start sucking him off when he does something notably better than Shepherd, who I consistently abused for financial performance like this...that went hand in hand with investment on the pitch. But for cutting £5m off the wage bill and not buying anyone? I remain to be pleased.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Happy Face

[Happy Face 29]

.....of course things are a LOT better than they were 2 years ago. We could have been in real shit, so he deserves credit for correcting his initial mistakes too.

 

As he now basically has us where we were when he first arrived, and he's fully aware of the debt this time, and the danger of handing out contracts willy nilly, we'll see how he gets on over the next 5 years. You'd hope it'll be a great deal better.

[ewerk 27671]

Match day revenue will be affected by a number of things, namely cup run, corporate services and most importantly, ticket prices. The club haven't exploited ticket prices and don't appear to be willing to do so. Though I believe that may be down to an analysis of cost vs demand rather than any genuine concern for the average paying punter.

 

The commercial revenue figure is a strange one. Swiss Ramble has this analysis:

 

Given that reputation, the club’s commercial revenue of £19 million might be considered a touch disappointing, especially as it dropped by £7 million in 2009, though much of this was because of the decision to outsource the club’s catering operations and some might be due to fans boycotting the club’s merchandise as a protest against the unpopular owner. In fact, commercial income might fall even more, as the four-year extension to the shirt sponsorship deal with Northern Rock is now only worth £2.5 million a year, only about half of the previous agreement of £4.8 million. Even this is not guaranteed, but depends on Newcastle remaining in the Premier League.

 

But I believe that we still have the seventh highest commercial revenue in the league, which is reasonably impressive given the team's fortunes over the past four years.

[ewerk 27671]

Also, the figures for 2007 included European football, which obviously boosted revenue.

[Happy Face 29]

Agreed, revenue is affected by a wide array of things.

 

Getting into europe as opposed to getting relegated is one of them.

 

Being able to sell tickets at top dollar to a willing sell-out crowd as opposed to halving the price of season tickets to keep attendances above 90% is another.

 

These aren't mitigating factors in Ashley's defence though. These are the results of his decisions.

[ChezGiven 0]

The commercial income is up to June 2011? Or end of year? Either way, the Virgin deal sees that jump by 8m a year which is effective from January. The catering was obviously costing too much, it hits the revenue but frees up resources and management time. If you add that back in, we are near to our maximum recorded commercial income of 27m.

[ChezGiven 0]

Agreed, revenue is affected by a wide array of things.

 

Getting into europe as opposed to getting relegated is one of them.

 

Being able to sell tickets at top dollar to a willing sell-out crowd as opposed to halving the price of season tickets to keep attendances above 90% is another.

 

These aren't mitigating factors in Ashley's defence though. These are the results of his decisions.

Why did commercial income drop off between 2007 and 2008? Ashley's lack of retal experience meant we lost 2m from when he took over in June till the end of the year?

[ewerk 27671]

Reduced sponsor bonuses for not being in Europe?

[Happy Face 29]

The commercial income is up to June 2011? Or end of year? Either way, the Virgin deal sees that jump by 8m a year which is effective from January. The catering was obviously costing too much, it hits the revenue but frees up resources and management time. If you add that back in, we are near to our maximum recorded commercial income of 27m.

 

I've not seen a reported figure on the Virgin deal.

 

I'd hope the stadium naming rights would dwarf that deal though and we'll smash the commercial record.

[ChezGiven 0]

Reduced sponsor bonuses for not being in Europe?

Dont think so. The commercial line is the best reflection of the wider economic picture. TV/Media money is insulated and collectively bargained, Matchday demand is fairly inelastic (not completely) and is driven up by cup progression and European qualification. Commercial is driven off sentiment, business confidence and consumer confidence. There is a decrease from the peak in 07 which cant be attributed to poor management but is of course later linked to the management of the club but for me reflects underlying demand contraction. The crisis, recession, impact on the NE business and consumer environment etc is of one of the drivers. Compounded by relegation and boycotts too.

[Happy Face 29]

Reduced sponsor bonuses for not being in Europe?

Dont think so. The commercial line is the best reflection of the wider economic picture. TV/Media money is insulated and collectively bargained, Matchday demand is fairly inelastic (not completely) and is driven up by cup progression and European qualification. Commercial is driven off sentiment, business confidence and consumer confidence. There is a decrease from the peak in 07 which cant be attributed to poor management but is of course later linked to the management of the club but for me reflects underlying demand contraction. The crisis, recession, impact on the NE business and consumer environment etc is of one of the drivers. Compounded by relegation and boycotts too.

 

Looking at a few other teams supports your argument, about 2007, but doesn't make our comparable performance with other clubs any less disappointing. Everyone apart from us is doing better commercially than they were 5 years ago.

 

 

Deals made this year will hopefully see it recover, following the plateau since relegation.

[Happy Face 29]

“Do you think me and Mike call it the Sports Direct Arena? We call it St James’ Park, because it is St James’ Park.

 

Santander and BP will be chomping at the bit to hoy £100m at that sort of sales pitch. Way to showcase the opportunity Decka.