Wolves Finances

[Urko]

So Morgan bought the club for a tenner on the proviso that he invested £30M, whilst i've no doubt he deposited the £30M how much of this has actually been spent and how much is left ?

The stand cost £19M inc £2M for the Moxey vanity gastro pub and the museum.

In our premiership seasons i recall the club making £10M, £5M & £2M profits.


Last season believe we raked in circa £27M in transfer fees against £12M incomings, now appreciate with player amortisation its not quite so simple subtracting one from the other.

Apprecite there has been some money invested into the Academy infrastructure.

So how much money do we actually have in the bank ? I would struggle to believe we have a deficit.

Morgan strikes me as someone who would want to keep a few million in the bank for a rainy day, well Steve it ain't just raining its a force 10 hurricane.

 

[Jungleee]

Aren't we predicted to make a loss of £7m this year?

 

[WalsallWolf]

I don't think financially we are as well of as people would think, certainly on the back of two back to back relegation's, a new stand, the loss in ST sales and also the loss on players.

We are still however by some distance the best "well off" club in League 1.

 

[Tring Wolf]

Yep, projected £6-7m loss and that is taking into account the parachute payments. Only going to get worse this year.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Aren't we predicted to make a loss of £7m this year?

Think they quoted a £6.5M loss last season, not sure anyone knows this year - guess that depends on losing the big salaries and whether we actually sign anyone.

I think the transfer fees sometimes confuse the issue as people think clubs turn up with £15M in used tenners. Although I applaud the principle of the thread we will need a forensic accountant to work out what Moxey has done. Multiple branches of the club all under Morgan's Bridgmere Group and undisclosed fees etc.etc.

 

[Taffywolf]

What about the Compton redevelopment.

 

[Urko]

We've been told we're not in debt, so what does the actual bank balance state ?

Recall being told continually by Moxey this time last year, that we didn't need to sell Fletcher or Jarvis, a 4,000 drop in last years gates is easily compensated by the sale of Jarvis alone.

 

[kidder_wolf_II]

Morgan has always been in this for the money. He wanted PL success on the cheap so he could sell stakes in the club for a huge profit and still be apart of our success with the remaining shares.

Now it's all gone tits up he may be looking to bail out but I bet it won't be for a loss. He must have a fair few million stashed away in the company accounts, we are debt free, we have an impressive infrastructure and in 12 months time we will have a tiny wage bill.

It appears Morgan has took a risk and it's not worked out but by safe guarding his own stake he has also safeguarded our future. Which is the only thing I'm grateful for.

I do hope I'm wrong and that he still has the desire to own us but if he has does that also mean the past 36 months have been bumbling mistakes and not just a cheap and risk free way of making him and the club millions.

Time will tell. Personally I think he will walk away in 12 months time with his £30m in his back pocket. I just hope if that does happen he doesn't just sell us to any old owner like what's happened at Portsmouth.

What were those words again?...... Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Floydstreet]

There's no money in being a football club owner and there are real ways to earn money in business, football club owning is definitely not one way to make money. If and when he goes, he will have lost a lot of money - FACT.

doesn't mean he's doing a great job, doesn't mean he's not making huge mistakes,but he's not raking it in and never will. Owning a club is more likely to be a vanity project than an investment project.

 

[luckyjim]

It's all very well stating potential losses, but cutting spending until the product itself suffers, in our context, means less people will to games, and therefore even less revenue will be accrued.

What we need at Wolves is a dose of quantitative easing in the form of new signings who can make a positive impact. The increased attendances resulting from watching a better performing product mean this increased spending is tempered by more profit. Simply cutting to the bone will create another self-fulfilling prophecy until we are told further cuts are needed and so on and so forth.

If we put together a run of form which sees us playing good, attacking football, catapulting us to the top of the league than it's possible we could get crowds in the low 20,000s. If we struggle as a result of playing kids and get sub 15,000 crowds, no doubt we'll be told how we have to cut the purse-strings yet again in order to avoid ending up like Stockport.

To put things in perspective, when we were promoted in 08/09, we actually made a loss of £4 million. People are fretting we'll be a new Portsmouth if we go £1 overdrawn. My own personal opinion is that Morgan has got us into this mess so he should take the loss out of his own personal fortune. If he's just going let the club run itself, then quite frankly he should be nowhere near the club.

In anycase, what I see is people putting forward objection after objection to achieving success through the means of pursuing a responsible strategy of effective spending. We should be dictating the terms of how we get out of this mess, not Jeff Bonser and a set of spurious, legally unenforceable financial fair-play rules which don't apply to most of our circumstances.

 

[Urko]

Would disagree, he got the club for a tenner and has added to the balance sheet with fixed assets.

If we have zero debt, then with our assets alone he would get his money back notwithstanding being in Div 1

 

[Floydstreet]

It's all very well stating potential losses, but cutting spending until the product itself suffers, in our context, means less people will to games, and therefore even less revenue will be accrued.

What we need at Wolves is a dose of quantitative easing in the form of new signings who can make a positive impact. The increased attendances resulting from watching a better performing product mean this increased spending is tempered by more profit. Simply cutting to the bone will create another self-fulfilling prophecy until we are told further cuts are needed and so on and so forth.

If we put together a run of form which sees us playing good, attacking football, catapulting us to the top of the league than it's possible we could get crowds in the low 20,000s. If we struggle as a result of playing kids and get sub 15,000 crowds, no doubt we'll be told how we have to cut the purse-strings to avoid ending up like Stockport.

To put things in perspective, when we were promoted in 08/09, we actually made a loss of £4 million. People are fretting we'll be a new Portsmouth if we go £1 overdrawn. My own personal opinion is that Morgan has got us into this mess so he should take the loss out of his own personal fortune. If he's just going let the club run itself, then quite frankly he should be nowhere near the club.

In anycase, what I see is people putting forward objection after objection to achieving success through the means of pursuing a responsible strategy of effective spending. We should be dictating the terms of how we get out of this mess, not Jeff Bonser and a set of spurious, legally unenforceable financial fair-play rules which don't apply to most of our circumstances.

You have to be careful and I'm all for prudence, but sometimes you have to speculate to accumulate

 

[kidder_wolf_II]

There's no money in being a football club owner and there are real ways to earn money in business, football club owning is definitely not one way to make money. If and when he goes, he will have lost a lot of money - FACT.

doesn't mean he's doing a great job, doesn't mean he's not making huge mistakes,but he's not raking it in and never will. Owning a club is more likely to be a vanity project than an investment project.

Unless you get a debt free club for £10 of course. Even though he had to invest £30m it was still £30m of his money into his club he's invested some of it wisely by using it for infrastructure and a successful push for promotion into the greed league and then using the clubs profits to fund our stay in the PL while also making profits on each season.

If there is still money in the accounts which I'm sure there is then he could easily sell us for £30m still in it's current state.

 

[WasStefan]

People who think Morgan is in football to make money are fools

 

[Floydstreet]

Unless you get a debt free club for £10 of course. Even though he had to invest £30m it was still £30m of his money into his club he's invested some of it wisely by using it for infrastructure and a successful push for promotion into the greed league and then using the clubs profits to fund our stay in the PL while also making profits on each season.

If there is still money in the accounts which I'm sure there is then he could easily sell us for £30m still in it's current state.

Which would be break even and I'm glad you are sure he could sell for £30m because I'm not. A potential buyer spending £30m too buy and then having to invest to take it forward, currently in div one ?

Sir jack took ages finding a buyer and I'd suggest Morgan would as well and if he doesn't I'd be seriously concerned as to who and why someone see that as £30m well spent.

 

[Urko]

People who think Morgan is in football to make money are fools

Well he's certainly not in it to lose money.

Some may say why should he ? well in this day and age if you own a football club and aren't prepared to take a financial hit then your chances of a modicum of success are greatly diminshed.

Not sure Morgan understands this, we may as well have had the tramp on the ring road owning the club.

 

[kidder_wolf_II]

People who think Morgan is in football to make money are fools

He's a very clever businessman and IF his plan had been successful he could of made a small fortune by either selling the club or Shares while in the PL.

It doesn't sound so foolish when you think about it. For £30m he recieved a football club worth about £20m with £30m in it's accounts.

I can see where people are coming from when they say you don't buy a club to make money but the sale of this club was a very unique one.

 

[WasStefan]

Well he's certainly not in it to lose money.

Some may say why should he ? well in this day and age if you own a football club and aren't prepared to take a financial hit then your chances of success are greatly diminshed.

Not sure Morgan understands this, we may as well have had the tramp on the ring road owning the club.

You're a multimillionaire. You want to extend your wealth.

You can a) invest in what you know, the construction industry, b) invest in other profitable companies with other wealthy businessman or c) invest in a football club and just about break even every season if you're lucky

If you really think any businessman goes into football to make money, you are wrong. It's not hard to understand, it's common sense.

IF Morgan did want to make a profit on his original investment he would have sold/put the club up for sale publicly as soon as we'd got promoted/sealed safety after our first season in the PL.

But he didn't.

 

[kidder_wolf_II]

Which would be break even and I'm glad you are sure he could sell for £30m because I'm not. A potential buyer spending £30m too buy and then having to invest to take it forward, currently in div one ?

Sir jack took ages finding a buyer and I'd suggest Morgan would as well and if he doesn't I'd be seriously concerned as to who and why someone see that as £30m well spent.

If there is still a large sum of money in the company accounts then maybe they would. Or Morgan could take the money out himself and sell up for about £15m which would probably go against any T&C set when he brought the club.

I guess it all depends on if there is still a large sum of money in the club which IMO there must be otherwise where has it all bloody gone?

 

[wwbug]

Firstly the net value of Morgan's investment in Wolves is now significantly greater than £10 . This will be his financial reward when sold. Profits appear to have been transferred into hard assets such a buildings. But why would any man want to buy a football club. To have fun and support it ? Or to make money ? Surely it has to be one or the other ? My personal feeling is that as the owner of this great sporting institution he should carry the responsibility and cost of making good.

 

[Urko]

You're a multimillionaire. You want to extend your wealth.

You can a) invest in what you know, the construction industry, b) invest in other profitable companies with other wealthy businessman or c) invest in a football club and just about break even every season if you're lucky

If you really think any businessman goes into football to make money, you are wrong. It's not hard to understand, it's common sense.

Apart from a few clubs i don't know anybody who could realistically hope to make money from a football club.

My original point stands Morgan is a rare breed of owner who isn't prepared to lose any money, so why own it apart from his own vanity and ego.

Unfortunately this vanity and ego is one of the reasons, we're in Div 1.

 

[dane]

So Morgan bought the club for a tenner on the proviso that he invested £30M, whilst i've no doubt he deposited the £30M how much of this has actually been spent and how much is left ?

The stand cost £19M inc £2M for the Moxey vanity gastro pub and the museum.

In our premiership seasons i recall the club making £10M, £5M & £2M profits

Because of course there's no chance the previous years profit would have been put back into the club so therefore we must have banked £17m

Last season believe we raked in circa £27M in transfer fees against £12M incomings, now appreciate with player amortisation its not quite so simple subtracting one from the other.

Those prices were with add-ons, we received nowhere near that in reality. We'd have also taken a hit from 'loyalty payments' paid to the players for each year they have left on their contracts, which is why players rarely hand in transfer requests. Paid by the club they're leaving and a big signing on bonus by the club they're going to

Apprecite there has been some money invested into the Academy infrastructure.

So how much money do we actually have in the bank ? I would struggle to believe we have a deficit.

Morgan strikes me as someone who would want to keep a few million in the bank for a rainy day, well Steve it ain't just raining its a force 10 hurricane.

There probably is some in the bank, but as I've said before, the club have to think long term whereas fans look at the short term. The folk moaning about Morgan not investing millions more are usually the ones having a go at a quid or two going on ticket prices. BRING ME MORE PLAYERS (but don't expect me to pay for them)

 

[Floydstreet]

You're a multimillionaire. You want to extend your wealth.

You can a) invest in what you know, the construction industry, b) invest in other profitable companies with other wealthy businessman or c) invest in a football club and just about break even every season if you're lucky

If you really think any businessman goes into football to make money, you are wrong. It's not hard to understand, it's common sense.

IF Morgan did want to make a profit on his original investment he would have sold/put the club up for sale publicly as soon as we'd got promoted/sealed safety after our first season in the PL.

But he didn't.

100% correct IMO , he could get a slightly better return for £30m with redrow than in football. And please don't tell me that the enormous Compton development of 10 houses is paying for it

 

[Urko]

IF Morgan did want to make a profit on his original investment he would have sold/put the club up for sale publicly as soon as we'd got promoted/sealed safety after our first season in the PL.

But he didn't.

He thought owning a football club was easy, he got extremely complacent and believed the good times would continue.

Unfortunately this complacency (joint 3rd lowest wagebill in our 3rd prem season) caught up with him and more unfortunately us.

 

[NewarkWolf]

Another thread about Morgan, wolves and money! Give it a $$$$ing rest!

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

100% correct IMO , he could get a slightly better return for £30m with redrow than in football. And please don't tell me that the enormous Compton development of 10 houses is paying for it

Thought there were 55?

 

[Floydstreet]

Thought there were 55?

Oh, in which case that at least 0.005% of redrows turnover

 

[wolvesjoe]

The accounts need a forensic examination, and it is well overdue for that to be done. I will endeavour to start that process over the next few weeks, and hopefully others who have an interest can help clarify certain questions.

 

[Urko]

My point is that we still should be cash positive, if there ever was time to speculate then this is the time.

When i say speculate, it doesn't need to be millions, not in league 1 anyhow. We should be looking to cherry pick Div 1 clubs better players, make them weaker and make us stronger.

Failure to get promoted this season, will put the club back years

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Oh, in which case that at least 0.005% of redrows turnover

a) How is that relevant?
b) 2012 revenue £479M. Houses at Compton (55 if it is that number) @400,000 = £22M =5% of turnover. Not inconsiderable and 1000 times more than you suggest. Good profit as no land costs.

However I was only asking for clarification and I'm neither a builder nor an accountant.

 

[dane]

a) How is that relevant?
b) 2012 revenue £479M. Houses at Compton (55 if it is that number) @400,000 = £22M =5% of turnover. Not inconsiderable and 1000 times more than you suggest. Good profit as no land costs.

However I was only asking for clarification and I'm neither a builder not an accountant.

No land cost, but luxury houses aren't cheap to build. So that 5% gets massively reduced

 

[wolvesjoe]

From my viewpoint, this debate is over-wrought and mystified, and I think Urko gets pretty close to the mark in trying to cut through the rhetoric.

Morgan brings a businessman's logic to running a football club, and, indeed, has made it a personal mission out of trying to prove that it is possible to run a successful football club that is run on normal business criteria. In many ways it is a vanity project for him to show the world that Liverpool were wrong to rebuff his takeover attempt.

So he feels entirely justified in not putting in funds apart from what was gifted him by Hayward, and what the club makes itself in terms of revenue. All decisions, it appears to me at least, are shaped by this basic financial model.

It's why he also has no qualms about involving his main business of house-building in with the ownership of the club, even though many find this ethically questionable.

It's also why he can make such apparently crazy decisions as appointing Connor, sacking Solbakken only a few months after appointing him, appointing a wild card like Saunders then not giving him any money, and now failing to sign players for a new manager. For Morgan, these are all justified by the bottom line.

And there is no big hidden secret about an overall plan to eventually make money out of the club. In Morgan's fantasy world where one mastermind businessman can overturn the financial parameters operating throughout the game, he was going to be able to rebuild the stadium and get Wolves into the top 6 all without dipping into his own pocket.

It's scary stuff to be honest, and even someone as arrogant as Morgan now might be thinking he has got it badly wrong. Someone who tried to buy Liverpool FC for 70 million was always a few sandwiches short of a picnic, but the cold bite of reality may finally be taking hold.

:wavey:

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

No land cost, but luxury houses aren't cheap to build. So that 5% gets massively reduced

Well no - as it's 5% of revenue not profit. Profit was £48M, so I'd guess a much higher %.

I didn't start this conversation to suggest that this was his motivation though - I just wanted to clarify a point!

 

[luckyjim]

From my viewpoint, this debate is over-wrought and mystified, and I think Urko gets pretty close to the mark in trying to cut through the rhetoric.

Morgan brings a businessman's logic to running a football club, and, indeed, has made it a personal mission out of trying to prove that it is possible to run a successful football club that is run on normal business criteria. In many ways it is a vanity project for him to show the world that Liverpool were wrong to rebuff his takeover attempt.

So he feels entirely justified in not putting in funds apart from what was gifted him by Hayward, and what the club makes itself in terms of revenue. All decisions, it appears to me at least, are shaped by this basic financial model.

It's why he also has no qualms about involving his main business of house-building in with the ownership of the club, even though many find this ethically questionable.

It's also why he can make such apparently crazy decisions as appointing Connor, sacking Solbakken only a few months after appointing him, appointing a wild card like Saunders then not giving him any money, and now failing to sign players for a new manager. For Morgan, these are all justified by the bottom line.

And there is no big hidden secret about an overall plan to eventually make money out of the club. In Morgan's fantasy world where one mastermind businessman can overturn the financial parameters operating throughout the game, he was going to be able to rebuild the stadium and get Wolves into the top 6 all without dipping into his own pocket.

It's scary stuff to be honest, and even someone as arrogant as Morgan now might be thinking he has got it badly wrong. Someone who tried to buy Liverpool FC for 70 million was always a few sandwiches short of a picnic, but the cold bite of reality may finally be taking hold.

:wavey:

Spot on. Football just isn't a normal business - you have to ride the rollercoaster to a lesser or greater degree.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Spot on. Football just isn't a normal business - you have to ride the rollercoaster to a lesser or greater degree.

So taking the club from profit to loss is justified by the bottom line?

 

[wolvesjoe]

So taking the club from profit to loss is justified by the bottom line?

Not spending is justified by the bottom line. Each pivotal decision made in this last 18 months has been shaped by the need to avoid further investment.

Sometimes that can be a problem in an orthodox kind of business, (the old speculate to accumulate adage), but it's the kiss of death in an industry like football where the normal rules of business are largely suspended. Players are drawn to the highest payers and to the most ambitious for their particular ability. Wolves under Morgan dipped their little toe in that world and had it bitten off. But to regroup and rise up the leagues again requires decisive action, and, most likely, investment, (see many examples like Newcastle, West Brom, Norwich, Southampton in recent years), not vacillation and loss of nerve.

 

[dane]

Well no - as it's 5% of revenue not profit. Profit was £48M, so I'd guess a much higher %.

I didn't start this conversation to suggest that this was his motivation though - I just wanted to clarify a point!

You're assuming they've all been sold though, which in the current market and at the prices asked would be some going.

 

[bod101]

has the 30m requirement all been put in bricks and mortar? maybe also the land purchase around the ground? i dont know.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Transfer Money

Apologies if I have missed a great answer on the mix in recent days. But I think the one question all is fans want answering is where is the transfers money.

Where is the money we sold Jarvis and fletcher for? What about parachute payments? Why does it appear we have to sell before we buy even with this funds and all the parachute payments!

Now is moxey telling us porkies about actual transfer fees. Is Jarvis only actually sold for £8 million or whatever it was over a ten year perioid or something ridiculous, or is it Morgan taking the money and puttin it back into his pocket.

There appears to be no ringfencing of player sale funds at all with money to money for new transfers. This for me the most disconcerting thing. Along with an apparent lack of knowledge that signings are needed which has been indicated by Thelwell.

 

[The Pig]

Morgan has always been in this for the money. He wanted PL success on the cheap so he could sell stakes in the club for a huge profit and still be apart of our success with the remaining shares.

Now it's all gone tits up he may be looking to bail out but I bet it won't be for a loss. He must have a fair few million stashed away in the company accounts, we are debt free, we have an impressive infrastructure and in 12 months time we will have a tiny wage bill.

It appears Morgan has took a risk and it's not worked out but by safe guarding his own stake he has also safeguarded our future. Which is the only thing I'm grateful for.

I do hope I'm wrong and that he still has the desire to own us but if he has does that also mean the past 36 months have been bumbling mistakes and not just a cheap and risk free way of making him and the club millions.

Time will tell. Personally I think he will walk away in 12 months time with his £30m in his back pocket. I just hope if that does happen he doesn't just sell us to any old owner like what's happened at Portsmouth.

What were those words again?...... Be careful what you wish for.

I agree with this, Wolves aren't a badly run club at a pure financial level, that doesn't mean to say there has not been some awful decisions made over the last 2 years that have cost us dear.