Premier League Sustainability Index

[Coops]

Just seen this article in The Athletic.

Fair Game, a group campaigning for improved governance in football, has published its inaugural Sustainability Index today, a project 18 months in the making that has called upon the expertise of academics, accountants and analysts.

Look at the list that they've announced and tell me something that doesn't look right...!

 

[Jack Russell]

I would probably comment if I understood the parameters and what it is trying to tell me.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Just seen this article in The Athletic.

Fair Game, a group campaigning for improved governance in football, has published its inaugural Sustainability Index today, a project 18 months in the making that has called upon the expertise of academics, accountants and analysts.

Look at the list that they've announced and tell me something that doesn't look right...!

I would imagine Everton given the current toxicity around the whole club....

Given that Klippety recycled Shergar's teeth l can see why Liverpool are top of the list..... lol

 

[Flump]

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021: financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.


Each of those was weighted to present an overall score for every Premier League and Championship club, with financial sustainability carrying the greatest value of the four.

That particular sub-section was calculated by measuring current assets, debts, liabilities, loans repayable within a year and wages as a percentage of revenue. All information was taken from official accounts published via Companies House to create a snapshot of each club’s financial health.

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

Well, to be fair, Everton did hire Lampard solely because the fans wanted him instead of Vitor Pereira, so no-one can they don't listen to input.

 

[Coops]

I would probably comment if I understood the parameters and what it is trying to tell me.

Sorry should have added in the original post;

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021: financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.

Everton's losses over the last three years amount to £371.8m.

 

[bod101]

is a higher number good or bad?

 

[Bawtry Wolf]

Sorry should have added in the original post;

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021: financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.

Everton's losses over the last three years amount to £371.8m.

Is there any weighting to the sections? The fact Man Utd are so far up considering their financial sustainability, can engagement. I think whoever did this has not read the brief properly or the table is upside down. I am not saying we’re perfect but we’re definitely better than Everton.

 

[Coops]

is a higher number good or bad?

Higher number = more sustainable.

Lower number = bad.

 

[Jefe]

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021:
financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.

Ah, that's why we're fourth bottom.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Interesting

 

[Bawtry Wolf]

Just looked at the press release, it sounds like subjective bobbins, a quote - ‘Liverpool led the way in governance, scoring highly in the Football Leadership Diversity Code, which makes up 50% of the governance score.’ I would suggest our football leadership is quite diverse across the club. Forest were marked down on finance as they’re newly promoted and spent money like no tomorrow.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Sorry should have added in the original post;

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021: financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.

Everton's losses over the last three years amount to £371.8m.

It would only make sense if there was some explanation of the criteria used to score these sections. Financial Sustainability should have a quite empirical basis, but the others could be very subjective. Is it based on opinion polls and questionnaires? Then there is the weighting given to each section. Could mean anything really.

 

[Coops]

It would only make sense if there was some explanation of the criteria used to score these sections. Financial Sustainability should have a quite empirical basis, but the others could be very subjective. Is it based on opinion polls and questionnaires? Then there is the weighting given to each section. Could mean anything really.

Think i am limited to how much I am allowed to copy and paste from the article but...

Each of those was weighted to present an overall score for every Premier League and Championship club, with financial sustainability carrying the greatest value of the four.

That particular sub-section was calculated by measuring current assets, debts, liabilities, loans repayable within a year and wages as a percentage of revenue. All information was taken from official accounts published via Companies House to create a snapshot of each club’s financial health.

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

 

[Zico]

Just looked at the press release, it sounds like subjective bobbins, a quote - ‘Liverpool led the way in governance, scoring highly in the Football Leadership Diversity Code, which makes up 50% of the governance score.’ I would suggest our football leadership is quite diverse across the club. Forest were marked down on finance as they’re newly promoted and spent money like no tomorrow.

Sadly, given their worthy manifesto and roll call of experts, they appear to have published complete tosh.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Think i am limited to how much I am allowed to copy and paste from the article but...

Each of those was weighted to present an overall score for every Premier League and Championship club, with financial sustainability carrying the greatest value of the four.

That particular sub-section was calculated by measuring current assets, debts, liabilities, loans repayable within a year and wages as a percentage of revenue. All information was taken from official accounts published via Companies House to create a snapshot of each club’s financial health.

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

No issues with the financial section. It's the others that have the potential to be BS.

 

[Bawtry Wolf]

They haven’t looked at the face validity of their index. To release it saying Everton are 2nd after the week, month and season they’ve had does lead one to question it’s credibility.

 

[Werewolf of Wombourne]

Anything that has Everton as the second most sustainable club, ahead of Man Utd is most likely worthless

 

[Contrarian]

Sorry should have added in the original post;

The Sustainability Index was divided into four sections deemed to be valued in the government’s fan-led review published in November 2021: financial sustainability, good governance, fan engagement and equality standards.

Everton's losses over the last three years amount to £371.8m.

They must have compensated in the other sections. Having fans regularly chase your players down the street shouting ... "advice" at them, is about as engaging as you get. Equality? Everything is equally **** at Everton, so again, sky high score.

I wonder if the "experts" hired to do this study weren't similar to the "experts" who referee and VAR Premier League games? The ones who interpret everything to pander to the Precious 6 and Everton. The football business has wanted Everton to join the gravy train and make it a Sky 7 for decades. With Newcastle & West Ham not far behind.

 

[Jack Russell]

Just seen this article in The Athletic.

Fair Game, a group campaigning for improved governance in football, has published its inaugural Sustainability Index today, a project 18 months in the making that has called upon the expertise of academics, accountants and analysts.

Look at the list that they've announced and tell me something that doesn't look right...!

I am still non the wiser, probably because the academics, accountants and analysts have failed to present their findings in a logical manner. Sometimes people can be too clever for their own good!

 

[Huge of Sharjah]

Think i am limited to how much I am allowed to copy and paste from the article but...

Each of those was weighted to present an overall score for every Premier League and Championship club, with financial sustainability carrying the greatest value of the four.

That particular sub-section was calculated by measuring current assets, debts, liabilities, loans repayable within a year and wages as a percentage of revenue. All information was taken from official accounts published via Companies House to create a snapshot of each club’s financial health.

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

By "current assets, etc.," do they mean the figures submitted to Companies House in 2021? If so they're a year out... unless they're simply using projections. Though having said that they have included Forest in the list. A tad confused here.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

I am still non the wiser, probably because the academics, accountants and analysts have failed to present their findings in a logical manner. Sometimes people can be too clever for their own good!

I think the phrase "called upon the expertise of...." is probably very telling. Called upon the expertise of all and sundry and then put together by a self-appointed panel of journalists and social network know it alls, would be my guess. Unless it is proper a peer reviewed study it is not worth much.

 

[TheConcourse]

We are staying up, sing we are staying up.

 

[lobodelsur]

Think i am limited to how much I am allowed to copy and paste from the article but...

Each of those was weighted to present an overall score for every Premier League and Championship club, with financial sustainability carrying the greatest value of the four.

That particular sub-section was calculated by measuring current assets, debts, liabilities, loans repayable within a year and wages as a percentage of revenue. All information was taken from official accounts published via Companies House to create a snapshot of each club’s financial health.

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

Hang on - I'm just digging out my 'Bull**** Bingo' card...

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Was the report written on Mersyside?

 

[tonto]

They must have compensated in the other sections. Having fans regularly chase your players down the street shouting ... "advice" at them, is about as engaging as you get. Equality? Everything is equally **** at Everton, so again, sky high score.

I wonder if the "experts" hired to do this study weren't similar to the "experts" who referee and VAR Premier League games? The ones who interpret everything to pander to the Precious 6 and Everton. The football business has wanted Everton to join the gravy train and make it a Sky 7 for decades. With Newcastle & West Ham not far behind.

Also probably the same party’s that the introduced all seater stadiums and sold out to tv companies

 

[Kebab Warrior]

The *******s Index

 

[tonto]

The *******s Index

Did you say *******s then

 

[Kebab Warrior]

Did you say *******s then

*******s did I

 

[Contrarian]

Align that with scores awarded for good governance, fan engagement and equality standards and you find each club’s ultimate score in the Sustainability Index.

Things that while decent enough in themselves, have nothing to do with sustainability. Sounds like the same level of spreadsheet science made to order by those who prove that <insert your produce here> reduces cancer, heat disease and piles. Start with a conclusion, ignore the data that contradicts it and work back to the evidence. Like we do with our player ratings most matches!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

One of the most comical tables of analysis I’ve seen in years! I mean look at the bottom three clubs - they are all fantastic at recycling players, so surely that should score them higher

But seriously, the whole order looks like made up BS. I’m struggling to see any logic around the relative placement of a lot of clubs listed on there, and that’s the first thing you do when your model spews out a result - does the output pass the BS smell test? Because if it doesn’t, then either your model logic is up the creek, or your data is faulty. Whoever did this piece of work either aren’t competent or they simply have an agenda and made the results match their desired outcome. Or both.

 

[clivewolves]

Links to the organisation that developed the index below. I gave the manifesto a quick read and it's basically the government fan led review in another guise. Some of it sounds okay, some of it unnecessary, and some of it a bit of a power grab.

A little snippet below about 'a new financial structure'.

• 25% of Premier League TV revenues -and future new revenue streams - should be
distributed outside the Premier League
• The Sustainability Index will define where 80% of that revenue goes
• Salary caps will be introduced across all divisions - the makeup will vary per division
• Relegation clauses introduced into all contracts
• Prohibit clubs from paying agents

Fair Game

www.fairgameuk.org

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6047aabc7130e94a70ed3515/t/61399c687192cb11bb9bd70b/1631165561000/Fair+Game+Manifesto+FINAL.pdf

 

[Zico]

Links to the organisation that developed the index below. I gave the manifesto a quick read and it's basically the government fan led review in another guise. Some of it sounds okay, some of it unnecessary, and some of it a bit of a power grab.

A little snippet below about 'a new financial structure'.

• 25% of Premier League TV revenues -and future new revenue streams - should be
distributed outside the Premier League
• The Sustainability Index will define where 80% of that revenue goes
• Salary caps will be introduced across all divisions - the makeup will vary per division
• Relegation clauses introduced into all contracts
• Prohibit clubs from paying agents

Fair Game

www.fairgameuk.org

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6047aabc7130e94a70ed3515/t/61399c687192cb11bb9bd70b/1631165561000/Fair+Game+Manifesto+FINAL.pdf

Hmm. Lots of people pouring in lots of time and effort to pie in the sky.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Links to the organisation that developed the index below. I gave the manifesto a quick read and it's basically the government fan led review in another guise. Some of it sounds okay, some of it unnecessary, and some of it a bit of a power grab.

A little snippet below about 'a new financial structure'.

• 25% of Premier League TV revenues -and future new revenue streams - should be
distributed outside the Premier League
• The Sustainability Index will define where 80% of that revenue goes
• Salary caps will be introduced across all divisions - the makeup will vary per division
• Relegation clauses introduced into all contracts
• Prohibit clubs from paying agents

Fair Game

www.fairgameuk.org

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6047aabc7130e94a70ed3515/t/61399c687192cb11bb9bd70b/1631165561000/Fair+Game+Manifesto+FINAL.pdf

Ah! There's the key to it! An "index" designed to keep the money in the hands of the usual suspects. The establishment trying to use the review to maintain the status quo under the pretence of sustainability.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Hmm. Lots of people pouring in lots of time and effort to pie in the sky.

First line of "experts" has two members of the University of Liverpool. Funny how Liverpool and Everton come out as shinning examples of sustainability.

 

[Coops]

 

[TriumphWolf]

Looks like another complete load of tosh to fill out article-space.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Looks like another complete load of tosh to fill out article-space.

But the frightening thing is someone from the Premier League will look at it, see that it confirms all they wanted to see about their favoured member club's and suggest it is an objective and fair way to judge how funds are distributed. Then someone from Sky will agree with them of course and before you know it "sustainability" is the future!

 

[waggys left foot]

Big restructuring of ownership seems to be inevitable -with Manure,Pool and now Spurs subject to incoming bids ,with sales of Newcastle and Chelski completed and new proposals from the ESL faction.

Only Silent Stan holding out for a better offer ?

And how will Fosun react ?And what is in the best interests of our fans and the club.

 

[GoldenHorseshoe]

Everton second?
Stopped looking at that point, load of crap just to push the current flavour of the month buzz word.
Everybody's at it, sustainability this sustainability that, 90% bull. The company I worked for had the word in their mantra even though the main customers were primary aluminium smelters, one of the biggest greenhouse gas producers.

 

[Deleted member (smith)]

Everton second?
Stopped looking at that point, load of crap just to push the current flavour of the month buzz word.
Everybody's at it, sustainability this sustainability that, 90% bull. The company I worked for had the word in their mantra even though the main customers were primary aluminium smelters, one of the biggest greenhouse gas producers.

Very pertinent comments …what does sustainability mean? How is it calculated?

For most people it means the ability of a business to continue and grow without any further capital. It has no direct relationship with the green agenda or climate change. You may consider tobacco a product in decline and cigarette companies having sustainability issues…indeed they have tried to diversify into food products but cigarette smoking has continued even though we gave know for more than 50 years that it causes lung cancer and is unhealthy.

What does sustainability mean for a football team in general and wolves in particular? Ability to maintain or improve its position in the league? Ability to service debt and not be dependent on handouts from shareholders?how do you measure that? Truth is that it is almost impossible to be sustainable in the hyper inflating business where player costs increase faster than revenues….

Everton is a good example of where the gamble on players may fail and lead to decline ….

In fact I don’t believe there are many clubs that can pay a return on capital employed appropriate to the risks involved. Hence most clubs are vanity investments or “sports washing” by the unacceptable face of wealth.