Wolves 22/23 accounts

[MattH]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1763815797980356863

Loss of £67m, but that doesn't include sales of Neves, Nunes etc.

Can anyone remember what the threshold was to avoid us getting in the FFP **** over the 3 year reporting period?

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1763815797980356863

Loss of £67m, but that doesn't include sales of Neves, Nunes etc.

Can anyone remember what the threshold was to avoid us getting in the FFP **** over the 3 year reporting period?

“Premier League clubs can make a £15million loss over a three-year monitoring period, with losses of up to £105million permitted so long as the £90million difference is covered by secure funding from a club's owners — i.e. by buying up more shares, not simply giving their club a loan”


“Turnover was £168m a £3m increase on previous year. Player trading and amortisation was a loss of £38m, this was made up of £79m of player amortisation and a profit of £44m on sales of players registration.

League distribution was £113m in the year and increase of £3m.

Wolves make a loss of £64m for year ending 2023. Without making adjustments for FFP exclusion and Covid adjustments, the three year rolling loss was £86m, meaning we were well within the FFP regulations.” - Mr Craig Spillard


Storm in a tea cup. Thankfully we’ve just about saved the situation with player sales will be shown next season

 

[NothingButNeto]

Explained: Wolves accounts, £67m loss and what it means for FFP rules

Wolves have a significant loss in their latest accounts — but how much of a problem is that really?

theathletic.com

Per Madley, the club expected to be below the FFP threshold by 2.5M, though that was based off us finishing 17th this season, so we will be more than OK.

 

[Chris H]

The 2022/23 accounts weren’t the main issue as it was a loss replacing a loss (2019/20 was a £40m loss which is the year this replaced).

It was always about 2023/24 because that year will be replacing a profit from 2020/21. To take an operating loss of £100m and turn that to a net profit to meet FFP required huge changes as per the summer.

The biggest positive is that by making those changes the 2024/25 year will see us under far less pressure than we were which falls in line with Shi’s comments about us being less restricted this coming summer.

Then it’ll be a case of what their appetite is to spend again this summer rather than FFP dictating our position.

To be in a position where by a club earning £168m lose £100m before player sales is ridiculous though, we should never have put ourselves in that position if the rhetoric is they want the club to be sustainable, because that isn’t.

 

[Leigh72]

Why would anyone own a football club? Do any of them make money apart from or 2

 

[WKFWolf]

No shock to anyone, I'm just glad now it's out there officially and we can move on from it hopefully learning our lesson and going back to young and hungry instead of gambling huge sums on players that we can't sustain

 

[yateleywolf]

Why would anyone own a football club? Do any of them make money apart from or 2

Yes it does make you wonder

 

[Premier Quality]

“What else do we know?​

Wolves owners Fosun loaned the club a further £64million in 2022-23 with that loan due to be conveyed to equity in the next few weeks.

That money is not factored into PSR calculations as PSR is designed to prevent owners from bankrolling clubs.

Fosun has provided another loan worth £18million in the current financial year.“

Interesting that fosun are still bank rolling us - should stop anyone going on that fosun have us to make a profit.

 

[WKFWolf]

“What else do we know?​

Wolves owners Fosun loaned the club a further £64million in 2022-23 with that loan due to be conveyed to equity in the next few weeks.

That money is not factored into PSR calculations as PSR is designed to prevent owners from bankrolling clubs.

Fosun has provided another loan worth £18million in the current financial year.“

Interesting that fosun are still bank rolling us - should stop anyone going on that fosun have us to make a profit.

If it wasn't for Fosuns support over the last few seasons we would be in deep ****

 

[Jawwfc]

​

Interesting that fosun are still bank rolling us - should stop anyone going on that fosun have us to make a profit.

Don't think accounts have ever shown that Fosun have took any money out at all over the years.... doesn't stop people from jumping on the bandwagon though.

they are a victim of the success of us in a way, factors outside of fosuns control FFP etc have limited ambitions some what but I should imagine similar will happen at Newcastle.

 

[TelfordWolf]

I see West Brom and Villa fans clutching at straws hoping for our demise.

 

[rincewind]

I see West Brom and Villa fans clutching at straws hoping for our demise.

This is because they don't understand how this works and having the attention span of goldfish, have forgotten we sold well over £100 million of players last summer.

 

[Fenrir_]

Scary numbers and proof that we had no choice in the summer but to sell players. Hopefully this season will get us back on a sound footing and we can start to build sensibly

 

[Urko]

And after all that we haven’t got a recognised striker

 

[RosehillWolf]

I don’t see how losing £184k a day is sustainable
Looks to me like we’re in a bit of a hole ??

 

[Skrilla]

£46m loss in 21/22
£67m loss in 22/23
= £113m in losses, £8m over the allowed £105m losses over a three-year rolling period, meaning this season we absolutely had to generate a profit.

If we didn't change course last summer, we'd be in the position Forest and Everton are now going into next season, which is when those three years are assessed.

Our amortisation costs in 22/23 were £79m, up from £60m in the previous year, and wages also increased from £104m to £123m.

That being said, I do think we'll have more room to spend in the summer as we can equal the losses in 21/22, but in all likelihood, any ideas of big-money signings are probably very unlikely, unless we lose one or two of our most profitable assets for significant sums (e.g. any fee we receive for Neto or Kilman would be all profit).

 

[The House of Wolves]

And after all that we haven’t got a recognised striker

Sigh.

 

[North West Wanderer]

And after all that we haven’t got a recognised striker

yet we have scored more goals than any other Premier League season and are in the race for europe. unreal eh.

I don’t see how losing £184k a day is sustainable
Looks to me like we’re in a bit of a hole ??

it isn’t, which is why we had to change our approach.

 

[Kebab Warrior]

And after all that we haven’t got a recognised striker

I know, this is our lowest scoring premier league season.

Wait, what?

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

“Premier League clubs can make a £15million loss over a three-year monitoring period, with losses of up to £105million permitted so long as the £90million difference is covered by secure funding from a club's owners — i.e. by buying up more shares, not simply giving their club a loan”


“Turnover was £168m a £3m increase on previous year. Player trading and amortisation was a loss of £38m, this was made up of £79m of player amortisation and a profit of £44m on sales of players registration.

League distribution was £113m in the year and increase of £3m.

Wolves make a loss of £64m for year ending 2023. Without making adjustments for FFP exclusion and Covid adjustments, the three year rolling loss was £86m, meaning we were well within the FFP regulations.” - Mr Craig Spillard


Storm in a tea cup. Thankfully we’ve just about saved the situation with player sales will be shown next season

By my calculations we were much closer to the limit
20/21 18 mil profit
21/22 46 mil loss
22/23 67 mil loss
I make that 95 mil loss so very much no storm in a tea cup and we scraped in
It was always about next years figures though when that profit drops off
Sort of puts into perspective how much Fosun are pumping in to the club every season,oh i forgot they are creaming the profits off the top lol

 

[Bill McCai]

The combined losses from the two years from 2021 to 2023 amount to £113.3million. That figure might ring alarm bells for supporters given the total permitted loss to stay within the Premier League’s PSR rules is £105m over three years.

But the PSR rules include provisions for ‘allowable expenditure’, so money spent in areas such as stadium and training-ground improvements, investments in women’s football and youth and community work are not included in PSR calculations.

For instance, Wolves’ current forecasts for the 2023-24 season predict a loss of £39.7million, but when allowable expenses are removed from the equation, it would leave Wolves with a predicted loss of £22m for PSR purposes.

When allowable expenses are taken into account, current predictions would leave Wolves staying within the £105million limit by £2.7m for the three years ending in May 2024.

Their ‘headroom’ had been predicted to be around £5million but was reduced when they settled on Jonny Otto’s contract in January following the training ground incident that saw him removed from the first-team squad.

 

[StaffordWolf]

I see West Brom and Villa fans clutching at straws hoping for our demise.

I think villa might have a somewhat disappointing summer ahead.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

OK, so many questions but maybe one at a time.

People adding up the losses on the accounts for each year against PSR. Where is Neves counting - his sale is not in these accounts, but does count for PSR, so if these pass haven't we got good headroom?

 

[The Pie Poker]

And after all that we haven’t got a recognised striker

Read the E&S article, everything explained very clearly including the striker issue

 

[Nige100]

So if we take off the 1st years profit we’re in trouble again arnt we this summer?

Next year the rolling forecast would be

£46 Loss
£67 Loss
So third year cannot show more than a £10m loss. Is that right?

If it is I’m worried. Surely only until losses come off can you have some freedom?

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

So if we take off the 1st years profit we’re in trouble again arnt we this summer?

Next year the rolling forecast would be

£46 Loss
£67 Loss
So third year cannot show more than a £10m loss. Is that right?

If it is I’m worried. Surely only until losses come off can you have some freedom?

Need to make a £10 mil PROFIT
Neves and Nunes money should be in there though so all good hopefully

 

[Nige100]

Need to make a £10 mil PROFIT
Neves and Nunes money should be in there though so all good hopefully

If we’re at £95m we can lose £10m can’t we?

That’s a huge relief to hear that the Neves and Nunes money isn’t included so that’s near £90m I’d like to understand why you say we need to make a profit though as I don’t get this at all so please could you explain that.

 

[Nige100]

If we’re at £95m we can lose £10m can’t we?

That’s a huge relief to hear that the Neves and Nunes money isn’t included so that’s near £90m I’d like to understand why you say we need to make a profit though as I don’t get this at all so please could you explain that.

Forget that just added them wrongly your right were £8m over as it stands.

 

[Chris H]

@WeAreTheWolvesII as someone who was very vociferous about FFP not being the sole driver of last summer you may be interest to read the quote from @Bill McCai in post 21 above.

Essentially after the summer exodus Wolves expect to come in £2.7m inside the £105m allowable losses even with mass sales and very few purchases. That plus the detail in the accounts about Fosun injecting £64m in 2022/23 and a further £18m so far in 2023/24 should put to bed the idea that Fosun pulled the plug and FFP was easy to hide behind.

If you want an angle to question the club on, a better one would probably be how did we get ourselves in to such a mess financially, why we didn’t sell players at their peak and why were we making big money signings that weren’t sustainable.

Let’s hope this summer when we are less restricted we’re far smarter about how and where we spend, and about how and when we sell.

 

[AndyY]

“Premier League clubs can make a £15million loss over a three-year monitoring period, with losses of up to £105million permitted so long as the £90million difference is covered by secure funding from a club's owners — i.e. by buying up more shares, not simply giving their club a loan”


“Turnover was £168m a £3m increase on previous year. Player trading and amortisation was a loss of £38m, this was made up of £79m of player amortisation and a profit of £44m on sales of players registration.

League distribution was £113m in the year and increase of £3m.

Wolves make a loss of £64m for year ending 2023. Without making adjustments for FFP exclusion and Covid adjustments, the three year rolling loss was £86m, meaning we were well within the FFP regulations.” - Mr Craig Spillard


Storm in a tea cup. Thankfully we’ve just about saved the situation with player sales will be shown next season

All OK…..assuming that Fosun still fund the £90M difference. That is a big assumption given their financial situation and the interest charges on all the loans they took out to buy their businesses. They have backed us up to now, but can/ will they in the futipure?
We know that Fosun want us to be self sufficient, so we will continue to have to sell the Crown Jewels to keep our heads above water.
Staying as an “established PL club” will not be easy. Look at Southampton and Leicester etc etc.

 

[Skrilla]

So if we take off the 1st years profit we’re in trouble again arnt we this summer?

Next year the rolling forecast would be

£46 Loss
£67 Loss
So third year cannot show more than a £10m loss. Is that right?

If it is I’m worried. Surely only until losses come off can you have some freedom?

23/24 accounts (this year) should be enough of a profit for us to squeak by after all of the sales in the summer.

 

[BlahBlah]

Why would anyone own a football club? Do any of them make money apart from or 2

This is a good article worth reading in full. Textor was the guy who tried to gazump us to make Gomes go to Lyon, but he makes some good points here.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/68437892

Look at Nottingham Forest. This is a club with an owner that has an incredible amount of capital. And he comes in the Premier League and he's told you can't spend it. If you spend it and it falls into a category of losses then we are going to sanction you and we may send you back to the league you came from.

It's not about financial sustainability, it's not about financial fair play, nobody is protecting the little guy. This is [expletive]. This is people making sure that you can only spend a percentage of your revenue.

Steve has to run his club with a top line of revenues which is driven by television. If we want to put in a bunch of money to buy more players we're not allowed to.

So you have to watch your losses and you have to find a way to live between the eighth spot and 17th spot or you go back to the second division [the Championship].

If anybody thinks that I have a problem with the way that Steve is running the club, and [how he] has stayed up for 12 years, just because we have difference of opinion on things... try being Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis right now.

 

[Nige100]

23/24 accounts (this year) should be enough of a profit for us to squeak by after all of the sales in the summer.

So would it be fair to assume we COULD if we wanted to and not for one minute thinking we will. Have the ability to spend at least the Neves and Nunes profit and then any player sales this summer and we get in next year. I think we’re all expecting Neto to fetch a minimum of £50-60m so add that to the profits of Neves and Nunes could we have around £100m to spend without any further sales required?

Could job im not into accounts I just can’t get my head round it. Need it in proper laymen’s speak. Haha.

 

[Kashmire Hawker]

For noting: a change in the parent company by Fosun has taken place.

Perhaps this FA Cup run could be the Enormous Victory we are dreaming of!

 

[Starsky]

Reading all of that, it makes total sense to sell Neto this Summer. Can't risk not doing so? As unfortunate as that is.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Reading all of that, it makes total sense to sell Neto this Summer. Can't risk not doing so? As unfortunate as that is.

Maybe we should keep him on the bench then. What if he got injured again?? Heaven forbid. Last time he got injured was against Newcastle. Let’s drop him and play someone else

 

[Skrilla]

So would it be fair to assume we COULD if we wanted to and not for one minute thinking we will. Have the ability to spend at least the Neves and Nunes profit and then any player sales this summer and we get in next year. I think we’re all expecting Neto to fetch a minimum of £50-60m so add that to the profits of Neves and Nunes could we have around £100m to spend without any further sales required?

Could job im not into accounts I just can’t get my head round it. Needs its proper laymen’s speak. Haha.

I think if we sell Neto or Kilman for a substantial fee, we'd have a lot more room to maneuver, as any fee for either of them is pure profit. If we don't, I think we'll continue to be prudent and target the £5-15m market to fill the gaps in the squad. I certainly wouldn't expect us to spend £30-40m on a player without one of the above two going.

Another one is possibly Joao Gomes, having seen ball-winning midfielders go for an absolute fortune last summer (Caicedo and Rice both went for upwards of £100m). I'd absolutely hate to lose him though.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

I think if we sell Neto or Kilman for a substantial fee, we'd have a lot more room to maneuver, as any fee for either of them is pure profit. If we don't, I think we'll continue to be prudent and target the £5-15m market to fill the gaps in the squad. I certainly wouldn't expect us to spend £30-40m on a player without one of the above two going.

Another one is possibly Joao Gomes, having seen ball-winning midfielders go for an absolute fortune last summer (Caicedo and Rice both went for upwards of £100m). I'd absolutely hate to lose him though.

I can see Neto and RAN going personally before Kilman or Gomes
We have to sell to buy thats a fact,lets hope theres more Gomes type buys out there

 

[Urko]

I know, this is our lowest scoring premier league season.

Wait, what?

Okey Dokey, we’re fine then and don’t need a recognised striker

 

[Bill McCai]

Good article

Wolves set to avoid rules breach despite big losses

Wolves believe they will avoid any Premier League financial charges after filing accounts showing significant losses for 2022-23.

www.bbc.co.uk

£50m for Jota