| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season 09:08 - Aug 18 with 1869 views | Tummer_from_Texas |
No doubt, I am not quite arrogant or delusional enough to think I know crap about managing big time professional football finances, even compared to the average supporter who has followed football throughout their adult life. I'm 50, and didn't follow any kind of professional football before I personally discovered Swansea about 6 years ago (I only followed international football, obviously a completely different animal). So most of my adult life, I had no clues and developed no opinions how this is done right, unlike how I'm sure I would if I had grown up in Wales and been a JB all my life.
So I'm not going to pretend I have any kind of intelligent insight, and I'd merely like to hear where the logic in my head has its flaws...
Swansea City was claimed to be 30 million in the hole at one point. Yes, I know, mostly Jenkins' fault or whatever. But here is how that has been mitigated:
* Summer, 2017: the club has (FAR AND AWAY) the biggest net transfer surplus in the Premier League, probably larger any other club in the entire Football League.
* Summer, 2018: the club has (FAR AND AWAY) the biggest net transfer surplus in the Championship, once again probably larger any other club in the entire Football League.
* Summer, 2019: club sells three guys for more than 40 million, while dumping two of our big wage earners in McBurnie and Jordan Ayew. Ultimately, it appears we replaced them (very efficiently, granted) at a tiny fraction off all that profit via loans and very frugal player purchases.
40 million or so for McBurnie, James, and the lesser Ayew. At 80K per week, a whole year of paying Andre's wage takes away roughly 10% of that massive windfall (4.16 million).
Meanwhile, I think there is a rational argument that being a Top 6 club this entire season, versus another season like 18/19 in mid table looking up wistfully at half the Championship, is worth a significant amount of revenue, promoted or not. Both this season and long term.
To that extent, the attendance these first two fixtures vs Hull and PNE (15,000 or so average) is the icing on the cake that should be SCREAMING at the Dickhead Duo (my fellow Yanks Levien and Kaplan) to keep Ayew, the ENTIRE season, and show some ambition. Just for the sake of their own bottom line, even if the blood sucking assholes don't really give a crap about Swansea City.
Another midtable club will end up averaging 13-14,000 at the gate this season, I'm convinced, based on the fact attendance has been trending downward. But an EXCITING club, clearly contending for at least a top 6 spot could/would/should reverse that trend no doubt. Let's say conservatively, 2,000 per match. And, if things REALLY go well and we are in the top 3-4 at least all season with a realistic shot at top 2, the Liberty could almost look like we were still in the Premier League, and in a frenzy.
So I'm thinking a good-to-great season is worth 2-5,000 tickets sold X 21 (remaining) league fixtures. Let's say the net profit to Swansea City Football Club of every ticket sold is 15 pounds. Then that, by ITSELF, pays 15-38% of Ayew's wages for a year.
And that doesn't even factor in the logical acknowledgement they need to make that - even if this season is very good (top 6) but doesn't result in promotion - a strong season helps Swansea City beyond 2020 in maintaining supporter excitement and overall momentum as a club.
In summary, showing some ambition isn't as risky as we've been conditioned to think, in my opinion.
Maybe there is something I am missing, so I welcome anyone to torpedo my theories, you Jack Bastards. [Post edited 18 Aug 2019 9:12]
|  |
| |  |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:16 - Aug 18 with 1801 views | Dr_Winston |
I'm not an accountant, but this is my interpretation of the situation. If any actual accountants want to correct me, feel free.
People talk about this "£30m hole" as if it was a debt on the books that just had to be paid off and then things would be fine. As far as I could work out with very basic research is that we were looking at a minimum deficit of at least that amount (and possibly much more) just last summer given the difference between our last acknowledged wage bill and the standard first season parachute payment. A deficit is not a debt, although it can become one.
Last summers sales largely plugged that deficit, but did little to cover our ongoing commitments in salaries to players like Ayew & Baston, plus future commitments to pay fees for players acquired in our last PL season, or the interest payable on pre-sold income (fairly common, most clubs do it to maintain cash flow).
Now after the sale of James and McBurnie and the departures of others by my reckoning we're about level again, possibly even slightly ahead. The question the club now faces is whether to use what surplus exists from the sale of those two to pay Baston and Ayew for a promotion push this season, or to continue trying to move them on and use the money for longer term acquisitions.
As someone said on another thread, the departure of CBR suggests that decision has been made about Baston. There's probably much thinking going on about a similar decision with regards to Ayew.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:17 - Aug 18 with 1792 views | nantywatcher |
Hard to base financial judgements based on attendances when even those numbers are figments of someone's imagination. What was the actual attendance yesterday? 12/13,000? Nothing like the official 15,000 figure. |  | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:31 - Aug 18 with 1704 views | Dr_Winston |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:17 - Aug 18 by nantywatcher |
Hard to base financial judgements based on attendances when even those numbers are figments of someone's imagination. What was the actual attendance yesterday? 12/13,000? Nothing like the official 15,000 figure. |
Thought 15,000 was about right to be honest. 6000 empty seats. | |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:43 - Aug 18 with 1633 views | mynamesjeff1 |
McBunie was not even in the top 7 biggest earners so have no idea where you got that rubbish from. | | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:45 - Aug 18 with 1627 views | Whiterockin |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:17 - Aug 18 by nantywatcher |
Hard to base financial judgements based on attendances when even those numbers are figments of someone's imagination. What was the actual attendance yesterday? 12/13,000? Nothing like the official 15,000 figure. |
Add to that some of the games will sell out anyway, example Cardiff and Leeds. Major flaw in the OP assessment is if Ayew was to be our player in September and get injured shortly after. Football is not an exact science but full of ifs and bits, this is why we love it so much. |  | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:52 - Aug 18 with 1580 views | Private_Partz |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:16 - Aug 18 by Dr_Winston |
I'm not an accountant, but this is my interpretation of the situation. If any actual accountants want to correct me, feel free.
People talk about this "£30m hole" as if it was a debt on the books that just had to be paid off and then things would be fine. As far as I could work out with very basic research is that we were looking at a minimum deficit of at least that amount (and possibly much more) just last summer given the difference between our last acknowledged wage bill and the standard first season parachute payment. A deficit is not a debt, although it can become one.
Last summers sales largely plugged that deficit, but did little to cover our ongoing commitments in salaries to players like Ayew & Baston, plus future commitments to pay fees for players acquired in our last PL season, or the interest payable on pre-sold income (fairly common, most clubs do it to maintain cash flow).
Now after the sale of James and McBurnie and the departures of others by my reckoning we're about level again, possibly even slightly ahead. The question the club now faces is whether to use what surplus exists from the sale of those two to pay Baston and Ayew for a promotion push this season, or to continue trying to move them on and use the money for longer term acquisitions.
As someone said on another thread, the departure of CBR suggests that decision has been made about Baston. There's probably much thinking going on about a similar decision with regards to Ayew.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Spot on Doc.
To sell either Borja or Andre now would be madness.
The 'hole' their wages are likely to create is small fry compared to the rewards of promotion.
If it goes tits up they can be offloaded at the end of the season. |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:52 - Aug 18 with 1580 views | Tummer_from_Texas |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:43 - Aug 18 by mynamesjeff1 |
McBunie was not even in the top 7 biggest earners so have no idea where you got that rubbish from. |
Going forward, to keep McBurnie in a Swansea shirt, he would have become one of our largest earners after a 24 goal season. For that matter, Dan James may have, too. And Jordan Ayew was already there.
This isn't about sunk costs, they are irrelevant. It's about costs going forward. [Post edited 18 Aug 2019 9:54]
| |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 10:48 - Aug 18 with 1366 views | jacks777 |
We are still receiving parachute payments to offset players still on PL wages.
Keep Ayew and BB for this season if they can be persuaded to stay.
We may even have a realistic chance of making the top six with those two playing. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:09 - Aug 18 with 1300 views | AngelRangelQS |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:17 - Aug 18 by nantywatcher |
Hard to base financial judgements based on attendances when even those numbers are figments of someone's imagination. What was the actual attendance yesterday? 12/13,000? Nothing like the official 15,000 figure. |
It also doesn’t take into account STH who are happy to miss the odd game.
If a good offer comes in for Ayew, he’ll be off which of course is the right decision. However, despite the love in on here, he’s scored twice against a league two side and played 70 minutes in a pretty poor team performance, without scoring or assisting. As important as I think he could be, you wouldn’t have thought teams will be banging our door down this morning, especially given his wages.
If no good offer comes in for him then I’d be hoping that he has a great few months and then someone like Newcastle are tempted to give us cash for him in January. As I said elsewhere, £80k a week until January is around £1.5m which, if he’s done well by then, we’ll recoup in the higher value for him. |  | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:14 - Aug 18 with 1255 views | ItchySphincter |
Read the Doc‘s post again. Nailed it imo. People think we got some money in so it’s okay now. If Birch can’t do what he said he had to do the position is pretty much unchanged and for the deficit not to drag in to unmanageable debt we’ll have to keep finding players to sell for tens of millions every year. If we want to keep the Ayews and the Bastons that is. |  |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:25 - Aug 18 with 1214 views | Swans9 |
Good to see a good topic posted on here well said. | | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:31 - Aug 18 with 1196 views | Jacket |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:17 - Aug 18 by nantywatcher |
Hard to base financial judgements based on attendances when even those numbers are figments of someone's imagination. What was the actual attendance yesterday? 12/13,000? Nothing like the official 15,000 figure. |
If it was lower, it could be that people with STs didn't turn up because of the Rugby. As far as the arguement is concerned these seats were paid for even if the people who paid for them prioritized the egg. | | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:38 - Aug 18 with 1174 views | Private_Partz |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:09 - Aug 18 by AngelRangelQS |
It also doesn’t take into account STH who are happy to miss the odd game.
If a good offer comes in for Ayew, he’ll be off which of course is the right decision. However, despite the love in on here, he’s scored twice against a league two side and played 70 minutes in a pretty poor team performance, without scoring or assisting. As important as I think he could be, you wouldn’t have thought teams will be banging our door down this morning, especially given his wages.
If no good offer comes in for him then I’d be hoping that he has a great few months and then someone like Newcastle are tempted to give us cash for him in January. As I said elsewhere, £80k a week until January is around £1.5m which, if he’s done well by then, we’ll recoup in the higher value for him. |
Would you be saying offload in January if we are in a top 6 position?
Surely the rewards of promotion are far greater than 5 months of AAs wages?
I would be furious if we blew promotion by weakening the side for the run in... | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:43 - Aug 18 with 1162 views | Badlands |
Going back to Birch
Minutes from Structured dialogue meeting.
'He commented that should the Club be able to challenge for Promotion in January then there is the potential that majority shareholders may invest then.'
Section in full
Investment
Q)
What realistically can we expect from the majority shareholders over, say, the next 5 years by way of serious investment?
A)
Trevor Birch commented that he honestly does not know the answer and efforts are being concentrated on here and now. He added that there is a considerable financial hole to fill since relegation from the Premier League which has been widely publicised. The intention is to rebalance over the next 1-2 years. He commented that should the Club be able to challenge for Promotion in January then there is the potential that majority shareholders may invest then.
The Chairman commented that following the sale of Dan James to Manchester United the Club are not desperate to sell players but should offers come in that cannot be refused then consideration must be given. However, it is the intention to keep hold of the squad. He added that if Investment guaranteed Promotion then every shareholder would invest.
Chris Pearlman added that Jason Levien and Steve Kaplan are open about running the Club sustainably, and not burden the Club with debt. It was commented that investment may come in the form of equity. |  |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 13:37 - Aug 18 with 1028 views | Tummer_from_Texas |
"(Birch) commented that should the Club be able to challenge for Promotion in January then there is the potential that majority shareholders may invest then."
Dumping Ayew in August or September would be a clear sign they hope not to be put in that position. | |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 13:40 - Aug 18 with 1006 views | jackrmee |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:09 - Aug 18 by AngelRangelQS |
It also doesn’t take into account STH who are happy to miss the odd game.
If a good offer comes in for Ayew, he’ll be off which of course is the right decision. However, despite the love in on here, he’s scored twice against a league two side and played 70 minutes in a pretty poor team performance, without scoring or assisting. As important as I think he could be, you wouldn’t have thought teams will be banging our door down this morning, especially given his wages.
If no good offer comes in for him then I’d be hoping that he has a great few months and then someone like Newcastle are tempted to give us cash for him in January. As I said elsewhere, £80k a week until January is around £1.5m which, if he’s done well by then, we’ll recoup in the higher value for him. |
Newcastle could well be struggling at the wrong end of the table too, so may need a panic buy or two |  |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 13:50 - Aug 18 with 981 views | NotLoyal |
Keep Ayew and Borja in their current form and we go up.
The financial rewards for being back in the premier League alone are obvious without any income generated this season. [Post edited 18 Aug 2019 14:35]
|  |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:05 - Aug 18 with 941 views | dameedna |
Montero has gone
Asoro has gone
CBR has gone
Maybe McKay will go
Maybe Routledge will go
Maybe Carroll will go
It is a bit of a lottery
Ayew wages are about 4 x what we should pay
A decent squad is useful however Laudrup argued for having 16 good pro plus nine from the u23s though his argument is flawed due to commercial interest
Hopefully we keep Ayew for a season at least
We need that player for promotion if he is up for it fine but the club may take an offer. |  | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:07 - Aug 18 with 937 views | Cooperman |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 09:16 - Aug 18 by Dr_Winston |
I'm not an accountant, but this is my interpretation of the situation. If any actual accountants want to correct me, feel free.
People talk about this "£30m hole" as if it was a debt on the books that just had to be paid off and then things would be fine. As far as I could work out with very basic research is that we were looking at a minimum deficit of at least that amount (and possibly much more) just last summer given the difference between our last acknowledged wage bill and the standard first season parachute payment. A deficit is not a debt, although it can become one.
Last summers sales largely plugged that deficit, but did little to cover our ongoing commitments in salaries to players like Ayew & Baston, plus future commitments to pay fees for players acquired in our last PL season, or the interest payable on pre-sold income (fairly common, most clubs do it to maintain cash flow).
Now after the sale of James and McBurnie and the departures of others by my reckoning we're about level again, possibly even slightly ahead. The question the club now faces is whether to use what surplus exists from the sale of those two to pay Baston and Ayew for a promotion push this season, or to continue trying to move them on and use the money for longer term acquisitions.
As someone said on another thread, the departure of CBR suggests that decision has been made about Baston. There's probably much thinking going on about a similar decision with regards to Ayew.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Yep, take note everyone. Deficit is not debt.
Well written Doc. |  |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:26 - Aug 18 with 871 views | jasper_T |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:05 - Aug 18 by dameedna |
Montero has gone
Asoro has gone
CBR has gone
Maybe McKay will go
Maybe Routledge will go
Maybe Carroll will go
It is a bit of a lottery
Ayew wages are about 4 x what we should pay
A decent squad is useful however Laudrup argued for having 16 good pro plus nine from the u23s though his argument is flawed due to commercial interest
Hopefully we keep Ayew for a season at least
We need that player for promotion if he is up for it fine but the club may take an offer. |
8x not 4x. | | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:34 - Aug 18 with 835 views | londonlisa2001 |
There are a few flaws in the OP argument.
Firstly there are two parts to the financial position. A debt at any given time and a deficit being built up over time to give rise to another debt. If the club outgoings exceed the revenue, clearing a debt at any given time is only part of a solution because, if left unaddressed, the monthly deficit will lead to another debt being built up.
Secondly, money received for players (and I don’t know where the £40m comes from) does not necessarily mean cash received. It does over time, but it may take a few years before that cash is received in full. Meanwhile, players that we bought a long time ago, still give rise to payments that need to be made now and in the future. Those payments won’t have been included in any ‘debt’ as they weren’t due, but they will need cash in the future.
Thirdly, next season the parachute payment decline markedly. So the revenue will decrease. A lot. If our outgoings do not decrease, the deficit will be increased and the debt will build up more quickly.
Ayew has 2 years on his contract. If we are able to sell him this season, we save a significant sum over that two years. Which will decrease outgoings, decrease any deficit that ma6 be built up and reduce any future debt.
Despite his ability at this level, it is still a gamble if we keep him (or any player for that matter) in the hope of going up. It’s a long shot for any club. The club isn’t really in a position to gamble (or we would rather it didn’t), so if an offer come in, we have to accept it.
It’s a sad reality that we are in this position, but wishing it away doesn’t change it. | | | |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:36 - Aug 18 with 820 views | NotLoyal |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:07 - Aug 18 by Cooperman |
Yep, take note everyone. Deficit is not debt.
Well written Doc. |
If only the truth was out there. | |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:54 - Aug 18 with 759 views | jackrmee |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 14:05 - Aug 18 by dameedna |
Montero has gone
Asoro has gone
CBR has gone
Maybe McKay will go
Maybe Routledge will go
Maybe Carroll will go
It is a bit of a lottery
Ayew wages are about 4 x what we should pay
A decent squad is useful however Laudrup argued for having 16 good pro plus nine from the u23s though his argument is flawed due to commercial interest
Hopefully we keep Ayew for a season at least
We need that player for promotion if he is up for it fine but the club may take an offer. |
How is "his argument is flawed due to commercial interest"? | |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 15:08 - Aug 18 with 689 views | Badlands |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 13:37 - Aug 18 by Tummer_from_Texas |
"(Birch) commented that should the Club be able to challenge for Promotion in January then there is the potential that majority shareholders may invest then."
Dumping Ayew in August or September would be a clear sign they hope not to be put in that position. |
At the Tim the comment was made both AYews and Borja were referred to as being on eye-watering pay.
I see Ayew and Borja as temporary solutions that may have to become more long term unlesss Cooper's kids start coming good or he plays our best side.
You do realise the only way the American shareholders are going to get their money back on Swansea is to keep us in the Championship for many seasons or get us back to the Premier League. | |
| |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 15:20 - Aug 18 with 670 views | AngelRangelQS |
| The economic consequences of paying Ayew 80K a week all season on 11:38 - Aug 18 by Private_Partz |
Would you be saying offload in January if we are in a top 6 position?
Surely the rewards of promotion are far greater than 5 months of AAs wages?
I would be furious if we blew promotion by weakening the side for the run in... |
I think it would depend on how secure we were in the top 6 and what was on offer but I take the point | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
