Wolves Net Debt £36M

[Urko]

I was under the impression we were virtually debt free.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/22/club-by-club-guide-championship-finances-2012-2013

 

[AW]

Grauniad at its' best with the spelling of molineux.

 

[Flump]

As the interest payable is nil, it's presumably notional debt to Morgan (or SJH?).

 

[yateleywolf]

Not as bad as some , Bolton and Ipswich come to mind

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Wasn't a large part of the "loss" last season a book write-down of the players value? If so, it is a book loss, not a shortfall in cash flow. Those clubs where the wage bill exceeds income are haemorrhaging cash, and need cash injections from their owner or loans, just to carry on paying their players and staff.

 

[luckyjim]

I think we had no debt from our last season in the Prem in the 11/12 season:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/apr/18/premier-league-club-accounts-debt

 

[Wiltshire Wolfie]

The truth is in there somewhere but you can fit figures to make any fit at all for your viewpoint..Me..?? Just bamboozled by it all at times.

 

[Essex Wolf]

The truth is in there somewhere but you can fit figures to make any fit at all for your viewpoint..Me..?? Just bamboozled by it all at times.

This 100%.

 

[Wagstaffe Was Magic]

The need to have bounced back to the Premier League comes into sharper focus. This informed my arguement of 'horses for courses' retaining MM until then.

We really need to get back there ASAP

 

[reanswolf]

I see Mr Pieman is the best paid Director in the division. No surprises there. On average they seem to be paid £150,000.

 

[Mr Wolf]

I see Mr Pieman is the best paid Director in the division. No surprises there. On average they seem to be paid £150,000.

Leeds?

 

[Tony]

I see Mr Pieman is the best paid Director in the division. No surprises there. On average they seem to be paid £150,000.

You seem to spend an awful lot of time googling to find something to use to moan about the Wolves or it's employees. Like me, you know Jack $$$$!

 

[mikic]

I have mentioned this a few times on here. Steve Morgan's other companies have loaned money to wolves.

In the event of a sale this would have to be paid back to Steve as part of the deal (most probably)

Therefore the statement wolves are debt free is incorrect

Wolves are external debt free but owe money to their owner

It was the same under Sir Jack, but he wrote his debt off when he sold the club, never in a million years would Morgan do the same thing.

Plus, if the money for the Stan Cullis was "earmarked" then what has this debt been spent on? Fans Parliament need to address this

 

[yateleywolf]

I have mentioned this a few times on here. Steve Morgan's other companies have loaned money to wolves.

In the event of a sale this would have to be paid back to Steve as part of the deal (most probably)

Therefore the statement wolves are debt free is incorrect

Wolves are external debt free but owe money to their owner

It was the same under Sir Jack, but he wrote his debt off when he sold the club, never in a million years would Morgan do the same thing.

Plus, if the money for the Stan Cullis was "earmarked" then what has this debt been spent on? Fans Parliament need to address this

Players wages probably.

 

[Mr Wolf]

Players wages probably.

£60m a season for 3 years & our wages probably averaged £35m a year over that time. It can't all be down to the Stan Cullis can it?

 

[reanswolf]

You seem to spend an awful lot of time googling to find something to use to moan about the Wolves or it's employees. Like me, you know Jack $$$$!

At least we can both agree on something. You know jack****

Actually doesnt it bother you that except that wonderfully-run financial institution that is Leeds United, that our CEO receives 3 times as much as virtually every other comparably sized club? (Leicester, Forest, Derby, Sheff Wed, Palace, M'boro etc).

If he took a wage cut to similar levels, we could keep entrance fees to a sensible £20 in the two ends of the ground.

What is wrong with that idea? I am sure Jez is considering it

 

[reanswolf]

Leeds?

Ooops missed that. Sorry Mr Moxey.

 

[kidderminster wolves]

You seem to spend an awful lot of time googling to find something to use to moan about the Wolves or it's employees. Like me, you know Jack $$$$!

Agree 100%

 

[Zico]

The need to have bounced back to the Premier League comes into sharper focus. This informed my arguement of 'horses for courses' retaining MM until then.

We really need to get back there ASAP

We'll get there before Ipswich

 

[Wagstaffe Was Magic]

We'll get there before Ipswich

I hope you're right!!

One question occurs to me .... A team that bounces back from the Chump to the Greed after just one season there, does it continue to get its parachute money for the stipulated years, on top of its full payment as a Premier League club?

Sorry if that's been covered before!

 

[NorfolkWolf]

At least we can both agree on something. You know jack****

Actually doesnt it bother you that except that wonderfully-run financial institution that is Leeds United, that our CEO receives 3 times as much as virtually every other comparably sized club? (Leicester, Forest, Derby, Sheff Wed, Palace, M'boro etc).

If he took a wage cut to similar levels, we could keep entrance fees to a sensible £20 in the two ends of the ground.

What is wrong with that idea? I am sure Jez is considering it

So if Jez to a £300k paycut, based on our average attendance this year, we'd all save 62p a game!! He'd only add that onto the price of a pie and a pint anyway

 

[reanswolf]

So if Jez to a £300k paycut, based on our average attendance this year, we'd all save 62p a game!! He'd only add that onto the price of a pie and a pint anyway

A worthy pay cut I am sure you'll agree .

 

[Big Nosed Wolf]

Half a million quid for 'advising' on a return to divison three and helping it to near bankruptcy without the parachute payments.(his words)

I suppose it all adds up to him being 'the best in the business'

 

[Deleted member 3604]

£60m a season for 3 years & our wages probably averaged £35m a year over that time. It can't all be down to the Stan Cullis can it?

Perhaps what they owe on players contracts in the short term. ( Net current liabilities ).

 

[dane]

or he's forgetting that we spent a lot of money buying players. on top of that you have signing on fees, agents fees, loyalty bonuses etc

 

[Wolves in Limerick]

mikic, I hope you are wrong. I had thought we were effectively operating in the black in the Premiership and that what upset the apple cart was our relegation. This was also how I was reading the sums here, though it would appear that the club had accumulated approx. £6m in losses in the Premiership. In particular I was focusing on wages as a % of turnover. I would have been of the opinion that this was considerably lower in the Premiership. There is a poster on here who has regularly argued that this rather than the outlay on transfers is what we should be focused on and that throughout our period in the Premiership, this was always among the lowest in that division.

 

[reanswolf]

Agree 100%

Devastated

 

[Mr Wolf]

Perhaps what they owe on players contracts in the short term. ( Net current liabilities ).

Possibly but that would be strange to include that in last seasons accounting figures. Apart from the stand I thought we were pretty much £ for £ in terms of turnover to expenditure that's why Solbackken got £10-12m to spend.

or he's forgetting that we spent a lot of money buying players. on top of that you have signing on fees, agents fees, loyalty bonuses etc

We also received over £20m it straight up transfer fee's received plus another £4-7m in add on's I would guess.

 

[reanswolf]

mikic, I hope you are wrong. I had thought we were effectively operating in the black in the Premiership and that what upset the apple cart was our relegation. This was also how I was reading the sums here, though it would appear that the club had accumulated approx. £6m in losses in the Premiership. In particular I was focusing on wages as a % of turnover. I would have been of the opinion that this was considerably lower in the Premiership. There is a poster on here who has regularly argued that this rather than the outlay on transfers is what we should be focused on and that throughout our period in the Premiership, this was always among the lowest in that division.

That was me. Yes for a bottom half prem club we paid the lowest % of turnover on wages, and were in the bottom 3 "wagepayers" all 3 seasons. I do accept its not easy, but this is why I feel Moxey has not done very well, he knew that wages = quality.

Clearly when you are relegated two consecutive seasons, you are going to have to pay "comparatively" high wages for the league you are in to get back up. So we have gone from 50% to 97%. That was an inevitable outcome of relegation, which Wolves have handled very well. But the premiership years were a disaster, especially as it took 30 years to get there only for us to get it so badly wrong strategically (i.e aportioning available money to transfer fees & wages).

 

[Mr Wolf]

But all our money has gone on wages Reans (it seems) that's what he's asking/saying? And some moaned that we didn't spend enough on wages.

 

[reanswolf]

But all our money has gone on wages Reans (it seems) that's what he's asking/saying? And some moaned that we didn't spend enough on wages.

Last season yes - as opposed to huge amounts on transfers. As I said the club did well last season.

Exactly what we should have done in the prem when it was more like 50% of wages on. Thats my point. We cut our own throats effectively.

 

[Wolves in Limerick]

Reans, I have found your argument intriguing and from what I understood the club were trying to do correct (as I suspect I'm generally put in the Mick camp, some would say 'he would say that wouldn't he'), however given the comments made around Blackpool, it would appear that this is the stance the Guardian take as well. My understanding was that wage inflation took the wages up to 97% of turnover, but then there were the players Stale purchased as well to add to that inflation. KJ has sought to bring the situation under control but our inability to off load our costliest 'assets' has meant we will probably have an extremely high wage to turnover again next season and further heavy financial losses at the club.
In reality are clubs now getting promoted to the Premiership in a catch 22 situation, if they don't invest in wages, relegation follows quickly and if they do they incur massive losses staying in the division (see Bolton).

 

[Jonzy54]

I hope you're right!!

One question occurs to me .... A team that bounces back from the Chump to the Greed after just one season there, does it continue to get its parachute money for the stipulated years, on top of its full payment as a Premier League club?

Sorry if that's been covered before!

No sir.The minute you walk back through the door the payments cease.

 

[Wagstaffe Was Magic]

No sir.The minute you walk back through the door the payments cease.

Thanks for that Jonzy

 

[reanswolf]

In reality are clubs now getting promoted to the Premiership in a catch 22 situation, if they don't invest in wages, relegation follows quickly and if they do they incur massive losses staying in the division (see Bolton).

In a way yes, and as i repeatedly say i know it is extremely tough for any promoted club including Wolves. Peversely though, by spending a low % of turnover on wages and more on transfer fees, i suspect strongly that you end up with players few other clubs want. Which may mean their sell on value is less because the quality you acquire is less.

Would never advocate doing a bolton, but a good comparison is Westbrom, wh ofrom a similar turnover as Wolves, increased their wages to £50m from £37m in Wolves final season in the prem, ours remained at £38m. Did that make the difference? Who knows. It still requires the manager to i/d the right players. But he may also miss out on several because agents get the best wages for the players they represent.

Yes its all hypothesis (as the same culprits will inevitably point out) but at the same time the clubs reluctance to increase wage levels to a level where they could realistically compete (without spending any more money but simply more on wages and less on transfers) quite possibly led significantly to our downfall.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Half a million quid for 'advising' on a return to divison three and helping it to near bankruptcy without the parachute payments.(his words)

I suppose it all adds up to him being 'the best in the business'

We don't know what he was paid whilst in Division 3. Not saying I agree with what he was paid last season, but he did take a 50% pay cut.

It's all $$$$$$$$ really, we all know why we have a negative balance sheet value and if you don't then search for the numerous threads about it.

Yes, there is a group loan and that was what was used to build the North Bank, again it's all been mentioned and explained before.

Don't take these stupid articles at face value as there is far more to accounts than stupid headline figures.

 

[Big Nosed Wolf]

We don't know what he was paid whilst in Division 3. Not saying I agree with what he was paid last season, but he did take a 50% pay cut.

It's all $$$$$$$$ really, we all know why we have a negative balance sheet value and if you don't then search for the numerous threads about it.

Yes, there is a group loan and that was what was used to build the North Bank, again it's all been mentioned and explained before.

Don't take these stupid articles at face value as there is far more to accounts than stupid headline figures.

So your point is?

I don't see the relation of your reply to my post.

What article do I refer to?

What has a group loan got to do with the post you quote? Or the rebuild?

I know about accounts. I know all about there being more to it.

But regardless the club ended up in Division three, would probably have been bankrupt by Moxey's own admission and he wouldn't have been paid far off what has been speculated on.

Whether he took a pay cut or not, he has to be held responsible in part for taking a financially stable club to this state. He has earned very well from it.

He has made many millions from it whilst others have come and gone.

So the finer points of the club's accounts are, in relation to him, irrelevant to an extent.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Only the first paragraph was in relation to your post, the rest was a general comments.