I'm guessing 38.2% from some basic math.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
I'm guessing 38.2% from some basic math.
Fuccck, where has that increase in wage costs come from?
Didn't we open a whole new advertising branch in London? Or something, could that account for a large part of it?
Didn't we open a whole new advertising branch in London? Or something, could that account for a large part of it?
...
referring to that commercial team i presume. london?
I'm pretty sure Gibson and Diouf's wages will still be included in these figures btw, but you've got to assume that any figure we saved from them two will contribute to Scholes' wages.
A newbie poster called 'backofthenet' has kindly pointed out to me that overall staff headcount has increased to 696 from 598 at the same point last year. That must have had a significant affect on these results although the club's financial report states that the jump in wage costs is largely due to an increase in player remuneration.
they do seem to mention increase in headcount for commercial operations as stated in the quote above.
Yeah but suddenly it doesn't seem that bad. 98 more employee's can't come cheap no matter what, and will have some effect on the results.
Presumably, yes. There were 628 employees at the end of the last financial year on June 30 2011. That has since increased to 696 in the six months to 31 December 2011.
That's clearly played a significant part in the £9.8m increase in wages in the first six months of the year but you'd have to think that a jump in player remuneration accounts for the majority of it.
The sudden increase doesn't seem too bad but given the loss in revenue from not playing in the latter stages of CL it does put us in a tight(er) position. Am I right or wrong?
Overall, decent balance.
Overall, decent balance.
Yeah that's a very succint summary.
The loss of matchday and prize income will be especially felt for the next few quarters, but hopefully a good Europa League showing and the progression of Chelsea in Europe might stop that (I think we get the largest share of the CL money if one team like Arsenal goes out this round, and Chelsea get to the final, but it's not a massive amount)
Overall it's good to see debts slowly but surely go away. They're almost at the point now where they aren't very important at all. It's a massive annoyance we've got all this outlay on bonds which were issued two years ago (we've bought back 20% now at premium prices)
Correct, the next two quarters and the end of year results aren't going to look too pretty due to the Champions League exit. There will only be a slight increase in revenue for the full year at best. EBITDA will fall but the extent of that decrease will depend on our performance in the Europa League and more significantly on whether or not we win the league (Bonuses paid to players for winning the league were £10m last year). I'll gladly take the significant drop in EBITDA for this year due to us winning the league again! We're fine with FFP either way.
44% for the first six months of the year. If we win the PL then we'll probably go past the 50% mark. I think you'll be looking at something like £340m turnover with £175m wages. So 51.5%.
I'd say the bump in headcount would account for a lot less than 0.8 of that 9.8m. You'd have to pay 100 new employees 80k/year for a full year to account for 0.8m of wages. This is just half a year and the majority of new staff will be on a fraction of that salary.
In the grand scheme of things, I'd say wages paid to anyone other than players/managerial staff and board members is more or less inconsequential.
I just can't get my head around the increase in salary then. We lost a lot of high profile players, and gained a few youngsters. I guess the wage increases have snuck up on us. Cleverly, Hernandez, Smalling, part of Rooney's, Park (?)
Going over 50% wouldn't be amazing, especially with the bond paybacks to come out as well.
EDIT: Just done the maths actually Pogue, surely that'd be 8 million!
100 new employees at 80k/year would come to £8m not £0.8m! In reality I don't believe the average salary for those employees would be that high (and I should know according to a number of people on here!
)Basically, the situation is, the Glazer's ownership is a pain in the arse, but a manageable pain in the arse which means we're slowly getting out of our debt, and hopefully maintain our high revenue increase.
I think the next significant moment in the Glazer's ownership will be when our kit deal with Nike is renewed. If we can blow our current deal out of the water (which seems very possible) it could massively help us with our financial plan.
Considering Liverpool announced their change in shirt sponsor over a year ahead of their changeoever, and our deal runs out in 2015, in a couple of years we could potentially be sitting in a great place.
I think the next significant moment in the Glazer's ownership will be when our kit deal with Nike is renewed. If we can blow our current deal out of the water (which seems very possible) it could massively help us with our financial plan.
Considering Liverpool announced their change in shirt sponsor over a year ahead of their changeoever, and our deal runs out in 2015, in a couple of years we could potentially be sitting in a great place.
A great pm from Ralph again (who needs to clean out his PM box!)
The 12.2% rise will be comparitive to the 3 month period in 2010, not the salary bill at end of the summer. (Can look at Q4 results, but tough to estimate without being able to deduct the bonus payments)
Anyways, as such the 2010 figure won't be inclusive of Rooney's bumper deal signed pretty much at the end of the quarter.
2nd quarter results impacted by Lindegaard signing, plus new contracts for Anderson, Evra, and 1 yr extension for Giggs.
3rd quarter results - New contracts for Fletcher and Carrick.
4th quarter - New contracts for Valencia, Park, Smalling.
1st Quarter 2011 - The arrivals, plus Cleverley and Hernandez.
The 12.2% rise will be comparitive to the 3 month period in 2010, not the salary bill at end of the summer. (Can look at Q4 results, but tough to estimate without being able to deduct the bonus payments)
Anyways, as such the 2010 figure won't be inclusive of Rooney's bumper deal signed pretty much at the end of the quarter.
2nd quarter results impacted by Lindegaard signing, plus new contracts for Anderson, Evra, and 1 yr extension for Giggs.
3rd quarter results - New contracts for Fletcher and Carrick.
4th quarter - New contracts for Valencia, Park, Smalling.
1st Quarter 2011 - The arrivals, plus Cleverley and Hernandez.
He PM'd me that too but he was referring to the first quarter results and suggesting that the increase wouldn't be as large in the second quarter or for the full year. But as we now know, the increase in the second quarter is significantly larger than it was in the first quarter!
100 new employees at 80k/year would come to £8m not £0.8m! In reality I don't believe the average salary for those employees would be that high (and I should know according to a number of people on here!
D'oh!
D'oh!
If we attribute 35% of the c. £10m wage rise to the increase in non playing staff then it still means that £6.5m is due to a jump in player remuneration. And that's for half a year. A c. £13m increase for the full year is still pretty concerning especially given the comings and goings over the Summer. The underlying revenue growth (largely the commercial division) makes it just about affordable although the Champions League exit complicates matters for this year at least.
Just imagine though what would have happened if we'd signed Sneijder! We'd have absolutely smashed the full year 50% wages to turnover barrier. Even without the early CL exit, at best we'd have been very close to breaking it.
As you said, winning the PL will obviously be a worthwhile reason for breaking our self imposed wage ratio!
I am assuming that some of our commercial contracts might have bonuses to us from sponsors if we win the league so perhaps that would offset what is paid on to players?
Still find it strange that headcount has gone up by 100 - i know the commercial operations are growing but no way can it be by that much.
Well even if the commercial contracts do have bonuses (I'm not sure they do at United btw) we'd have received the vast majority of that last year anyway.
You're right about headcount. Even taking into consideration the large new HQ in London it does seem a huge increase. What I would say is that the investment in the commercial division back in 2008 has certainly paid off in spades so there's no reason to think we won't experience a similar benefit this time. You just have to take a bit of a hit initially in terms of profitability but in the medium-long term this investment in people should pay off.
And just to add to that, I bet there aren't many companies of United's size who have taken on 100 new employees over the past year! Another positive resulting from the Glazers takeover!
There are NO positives to the Glazer takeover
Do you really believe that ?
The ratio is something to keep an eye on but I don't view it as an absolute cap. Given some of the sponsorship deals are nearing the end of their cycle I would expect the ratio to creep up until new deals are signed.
Yes I do. Leeches.
What the wage increase shows is that it's really an outrageous luxury to have someone like Berbatov on 100k per week as your fourth choice striker. With the likes of Hernandez and Welbeck signing vastly improved contracts I really think it becomes hard to justify keeping him. I think you can make the same argument for Vidic and Ferdinand given their injury problems although I'd certainly keep one of them for next season.
I don't think it's generally appreciated just how deep our first team squad is compared to some other top clubs and how expensive that is. Yes, we won't bring in the likes of Nasri on £180k per week but we still maintain a very strong squad and they're all paid bloody well! Too well probably due to what the likes of fecking City pay their players because even though we don't pay what they do, they still force us and other clubs to push our salary level up to keep our own players happy.
I don't think it's generally appreciated just how deep our first team squad is compared to some other top clubs and how expensive that is. Yes, we won't bring in the likes of Nasri on £180k per week but we still maintain a very strong squad and they're all paid bloody well! Too well probably due to what the likes of fecking City pay their players because even though we don't pay what they do, they still force us and other clubs to push our salary level up to keep our own players happy.
as long as we stay clear of the 50% barrier - we can't really complain too much. We are probably one of 2-3 topclubs in Europe who are at that level
People insisting there are positives to the takeover!You might be right but equally it's difficult to find players of Berbatov's talent happy to play the fourth striker role even on his wages.
We do have a very deep squad but it does look difficult now to add one or two world-class players without having to lose two or three to create room.
We do have a very deep squad but it does look difficult now to add one or two world-class players without having to lose two or three to create room.
United have made it pretty clear that it is an absolute cap in the sense that we budget to keep below the 50% mark. It's one of the key financial performance targets in the results provided to bond holders and David Gill regularly mentions it when he talks to the press.
A new Nike deal will give us a big boost in revenue but before that comes up for re-negotiation we need to keep up the momentum at the second tier sponsorship and commerical level and I'm sure the recent investment in that area is designed to do just that.
We want BOTH Arsenal and Chelsea to go out in this round. People talk about the impact on the Premier League's coefficient but English clubs would have to have another 2-3 years of awful performances in Europe for that to become an issue. Also, if ourselves and City progress to the latter stages of the Europa League then the PL's coefficient will be perfectly ok for this year anyway.
The premium paid for buying back the bonds isn't really a huge issue. It's c. £5m for the £92.8m of bonds bought back. Remember using cash to buy these back saves us paying 8.5% interest compared to the 0.5% we'd earn with the cash in the bank.
It's gotten to the point now where we probably have been hampered with the takeover. We've been fecked and bought by two Americans with no affiliation with the club in order to make a lot of money from our team. Money which loyal fans pump in constantly.
However, the thing is it's happened now. It sucks, and it's worthwhile thinking how different things would be without them,but we've still got a fantastic football team, and slowly but surely, the Glazers are harming us less and less IMO.
A new contract for someone like Park wouldn't see a big increase though. That would have been pretty much just an extension I'd have thought. The really big increases occur when you reward young players for breaking into the first team and making an impact because they're starting off from a low salary level. Someone like Hernandez was probably only on 20k per week for his first contract. The reported 70k increase to 90k per week was quite possibly larger than was given to Rooney or at least close to it anyway.
Agreed.
I've always been under the impression (perhaps mistakenly) that United would exceed the 50% for 'that' player, at least in the short term. Remembering of course that the budget of 45%-50% is set against the projected performance of 3rd place league finish, CL group phase, etc etc.
No question that is progressing well.
BBC News - Manchester United boosts revenues and cuts its debt
Manchester United says its revenues for the last six months of 2011 increased to £175m, as it released its latest financial figures.
It is an increase of £18.5m on the Old Trafford club's revenues for the same period last year.
The Premier League club said debt was £439m at the end of 2011, less than the £508m reported 12 months previously.
Last year, United said it would partially float on the Singapore Stock Exchange, but that has yet to happen.
The team, currently second to rivals Manchester City in the Premier League, are also competing in the Europa League.
Match day revenues (up from £52.4m to £54.5m), media revenue (up from £53.7m to £60.9m) and commercial revenue (up from £50.4m to £58.6m) were all ahead.
United were taken over by the Glazer family in 2005 and have had a rocky relationship with many of the fans since then over the level of debt at the club.
A buyback of bonds, sold as part of a £500m refinancing operation two years ago, helped bring down the latest debt figures.
However, total operating costs - up from £96.9m to £110.8m - and net player capital expenditure - up from £11.7m to £47.9m - both rose.
The latter's rise was due to a summer outlay on players David de Gea, Ashley Young and Phil Jones, as manager Sir Alex Ferguson set about freshening up his team.
Other figures show a bank balance of £50.9m and a £10.4m rise in general capital expenditure, mainly due to upgrading hospitality areas.
Without the lucrative revenue streams garnered from competing in the Champions League, the club is expected to see a decline in income over the next half-year.
Manchester United says its revenues for the last six months of 2011 increased to £175m, as it released its latest financial figures.
It is an increase of £18.5m on the Old Trafford club's revenues for the same period last year.
The Premier League club said debt was £439m at the end of 2011, less than the £508m reported 12 months previously.
Last year, United said it would partially float on the Singapore Stock Exchange, but that has yet to happen.
The team, currently second to rivals Manchester City in the Premier League, are also competing in the Europa League.
Match day revenues (up from £52.4m to £54.5m), media revenue (up from £53.7m to £60.9m) and commercial revenue (up from £50.4m to £58.6m) were all ahead.
United were taken over by the Glazer family in 2005 and have had a rocky relationship with many of the fans since then over the level of debt at the club.
A buyback of bonds, sold as part of a £500m refinancing operation two years ago, helped bring down the latest debt figures.
However, total operating costs - up from £96.9m to £110.8m - and net player capital expenditure - up from £11.7m to £47.9m - both rose.
The latter's rise was due to a summer outlay on players David de Gea, Ashley Young and Phil Jones, as manager Sir Alex Ferguson set about freshening up his team.
Other figures show a bank balance of £50.9m and a £10.4m rise in general capital expenditure, mainly due to upgrading hospitality areas.
Without the lucrative revenue streams garnered from competing in the Champions League, the club is expected to see a decline in income over the next half-year.
As far as I know Rio's current contract will end in June 2013. Vidic's contract will end in June 2014. They will probably both stay next season. It's not looking good for Berba. He will probably join PIG and leave the club.
Regarding our finance it's looking good. The key figure in my opinion is that our dept have decreased with £69m since Q1 2012. But the best part is when our planned Singapore IPO will take place. Then we can't talk about future business.
- Status