Swiss Ramble - Swans Finances

[Magic_Michu]

https://twitter.com/ianmitchelmore/status/1531208494040461316?s=21&t=Khd2IzplvndAhKVkevdiig

An interesting read… and still a large majority of our fans want to just throw money at the team without selling players. Bonkers.

 

[JackSomething]

Thanks for that, lots to digest in there. It's clear that despite prudent financial work since relegation, 21/22's accounts are going to be more troubling given the end of parachute payments.

Those moaning that selling Piroe or Downes and gambling on being able to find a cheap replacement is a bad idea are missing the point that without that, we may not be able to continue as a going concern (as noted by the auditors).

The £120m spent on players in the last 2 seasons in the PL was already known, but still boggles the mind. Imagine how much more prepared for a promotion push we'd have been after relegation without all that wasted money (not to mention the huge wages attached to some of those signings).

Finally, there was also a great graph that showed owners throwing their own money at the club is no guarantee of success:

 

[bakajack]

Sobering thoughts that 25% of the clubs in the Championship are spending over 200% of their income on wages alone - only in football could a business be run in that way.

I still cannot understand how Stoke have yet to fall foul of the FFP rules their losses and debts are very well publicised.

 

[Pacemaker]

Thanks for that, lots to digest in there. It's clear that despite prudent financial work since relegation, 21/22's accounts are going to be more troubling given the end of parachute payments.

Those moaning that selling Piroe or Downes and gambling on being able to find a cheap replacement is a bad idea are missing the point that without that, we may not be able to continue as a going concern (as noted by the auditors).

The £120m spent on players in the last 2 seasons in the PL was already known, but still boggles the mind. Imagine how much more prepared for a promotion push we'd have been after relegation without all that wasted money (not to mention the huge wages attached to some of those signings).

Finally, there was also a great graph that showed owners throwing their own money at the club is no guarantee of success:

That £13m spend by our owners was only for the last season 2020/21 prior to that there had been no “investment” since 2013. This is the future for us a sustainable model, we pay our way or fall to the way side.

‘The auditors note that if player sales are not our main source of income going forward this “may cast significant doubt about the clubs ability to continue as a going concern”.

That should be a big sign that things are not going to change and could get a lot worse.

 

[Darran]

Next level.

 

[Uxy]

Our income differential between this set of accounts and for the season just gone is probably around the £20-£25m mark IMO.

Important to have that context because these accounts are a year out of date, and our world is very different now.

A question the Trust haven't answered yet is whether any additional CLN's have been taken on. Given the above, and our lack of sales incoming to date, I'm not sure how they couldn't have been.

This is why I have an issue with relying on trading profits to fill the hole. The gap is going to be around the £10m mark, probably more actually. That's a lot to recoup every year. I'd be far happier if we had a much firmer grip on our costs, before this spirals out of all control, so that we're less reliant on selling. We're at the edge of a precipice IMO.

 

[monmouth]

Our income differential between this set of accounts and for the season just gone is probably around the £20-£25m mark IMO.

Important to have that context because these accounts are a year out of date, and our world is very different now.

A question the Trust haven't answered yet is whether any additional CLN's have been taken on. Given the above, and our lack of sales incoming to date, I'm not sure how they couldn't have been.

This is why I have an issue with relying on trading profits to fill the hole. The gap is going to be around the £10m mark, probably more actually. That's a lot to recoup every year. I'd be far happier if we had a much firmer grip on our costs, before this spirals out of all control, so that we're less reliant on selling. We're at the edge of a precipice IMO.

And a good morning to you too.

I think we are hanging over that precipice clinging on by our fingertips. Everything that was good about the club is now extinguished.

It's probably best now that we sell what we can, buy nobody and if that leads to a relegation or two, so be it. A solvent sustainable club should be the limit of our 'ambition' just now. Jenkins et al, really f****d us over and the yanks fell for his bullshit and are out of their depth with this (actually most championship owners are on a hiding anyway). For those crowing about Cooper, like it or not, him shitting out of the two playoffs with Ayew and all his expensive loan players, barring something special from Russ (no, me neither) was probably the final throw of the dice. Still, at least he got Forest up .

 

[Uxy]

Our income differential between this set of accounts and for the season just gone is probably around the £20-£25m mark IMO.

Important to have that context because these accounts are a year out of date, and our world is very different now.

A question the Trust haven't answered yet is whether any additional CLN's have been taken on. Given the above, and our lack of sales incoming to date, I'm not sure how they couldn't have been.

This is why I have an issue with relying on trading profits to fill the hole. The gap is going to be around the £10m mark, probably more actually. That's a lot to recoup every year. I'd be far happier if we had a much firmer grip on our costs, before this spirals out of all control, so that we're less reliant on selling. We're at the edge of a precipice IMO.

And a good morning to you too.

I think we are hanging over that precipice clinging on by our fingertips. Everything that was good about the club is now extinguished.

It's probably best now that we sell what we can, buy nobody and if that leads to a relegation or two, so be it. A solvent sustainable club should be the limit of our 'ambition' just now. Jenkins et al, really f****d us over and the yanks fell for his bullshit and are out of their depth with this (actually most championship owners are on a hiding anyway). For those crowing about Cooper, like it or not, him shitting out of the two playoffs with Ayew and all his expensive loan players, barring something special from Russ (no, me neither) was probably the final throw of the dice. Still, at least he got Forest up .

It's a Monday and I'm having to read through technical documentation. I'm a bit grumpy :lol:

I wouldn't pin the transfer strategy solely, or even mostly, on Cooper. Everything has to be seen in the context of the ownership, which puts promotion over everything as that's how they make any sort of return. Also have to factor in Jenkins' follies which crippled how easily we could manouver. If we'd gone down the "buy young players cheaply" route, that was literally his background. We went down the "aim for promotion and don't really care about next year one". That's on ownership IMO.

As for now, I wonder whether we're the club that identified the likes of Piroe, Obafemi and Downes, or are we the ones that shat the bed in January. How much did Cooper (and Scott) factor into the Piroe and Oba deals (and their long pitchside chat up in Forest may be illustrative there).

Long term, I'd agree with you. It'll never get buy-in though, from fans or owners, so I fear we're destined to see debt levels spiral and the club move further away from what it was.

And on that happy note ...

 

[Londonlisa2001]

And a good morning to you too.

I think we are hanging over that precipice clinging on by our fingertips. Everything that was good about the club is now extinguished.

It's probably best now that we sell what we can, buy nobody and if that leads to a relegation or two, so be it. A solvent sustainable club should be the limit of our 'ambition' just now. Jenkins et al, really f****d us over and the yanks fell for his bullshit and are out of their depth with this (actually most championship owners are on a hiding anyway). For those crowing about Cooper, like it or not, him shitting out of the two playoffs with Ayew and all his expensive loan players, barring something special from Russ (no, me neither) was probably the final throw of the dice. Still, at least he got Forest up .

It's a Monday and I'm having to read through technical documentation. I'm a bit grumpy :lol:

I wouldn't pin the transfer strategy solely, or even mostly, on Cooper. Everything has to be seen in the context of the ownership, which puts promotion over everything as that's how they make any sort of return. Also have to factor in Jenkins' follies which crippled how easily we could manouver. If we'd gone down the "buy young players cheaply" route, that was literally his background. We went down the "aim for promotion and don't really care about next year one". That's on ownership IMO.

As for now, I wonder whether we're the club that identified the likes of Piroe, Obafemi and Downes, or are we the ones that shat the bed in January. How much did Cooper (and Scott) factor into the Piroe and Oba deals (and their long pitchside chat up in Forest may be illustrative there).

Long term, I'd agree with you. It'll never get buy-in though, from fans or owners, so I fear we're destined to see debt levels spiral and the club move further away from what it was.

And on that happy note ...

So this discussion has made me actually look at the accounts. The ‘directors emoluments’ is interesting. Ffs.
It look as though we either paid a whack load to Birch as compensation for him ‘resigning to go to Spurs’ or we are paying someone else something (and by someone else, that could only realistically be Silverstein or Porter as no one was getting paid before and they were the only ones that joined in the year - it will be a pay out to Birch though I would bet).
We may help our financial situation if we stopped shelling out loads every year for sacking mangers, directors of football, assistants etc etc.
On the player front, it was Cooper / Scott who identified both Piroe and Obafemi - Cooper knew both from days at under 17 level. Yet to see the new regime quality (ignoring the keeper who, to be frank, doesn’t strike me as a great buy).

 

[Uxy]

It's a Monday and I'm having to read through technical documentation. I'm a bit grumpy :lol:

I wouldn't pin the transfer strategy solely, or even mostly, on Cooper. Everything has to be seen in the context of the ownership, which puts promotion over everything as that's how they make any sort of return. Also have to factor in Jenkins' follies which crippled how easily we could manouver. If we'd gone down the "buy young players cheaply" route, that was literally his background. We went down the "aim for promotion and don't really care about next year one". That's on ownership IMO.

As for now, I wonder whether we're the club that identified the likes of Piroe, Obafemi and Downes, or are we the ones that shat the bed in January. How much did Cooper (and Scott) factor into the Piroe and Oba deals (and their long pitchside chat up in Forest may be illustrative there).

Long term, I'd agree with you. It'll never get buy-in though, from fans or owners, so I fear we're destined to see debt levels spiral and the club move further away from what it was.

And on that happy note ...

So this discussion has made me actually look at the accounts. The ‘directors emoluments’ is interesting. Ffs.
It look as though we either paid a whack load to Birch as compensation for him ‘resigning to go to Spurs’ or we are paying someone else something (and by someone else, that could only realistically be Silverstein or Porter as no one was getting paid before and they were the only ones that joined in the year - it will be a pay out to Birch though I would bet).
We may help our financial situation if we stopped shelling out loads every year for sacking mangers, directors of football, assistants etc etc.
On the player front, it was Cooper / Scott who identified both Piroe and Obafemi - Cooper knew both from days at under 17 level. Yet to see the new regime quality (ignoring the keeper who, to be frank, doesn’t strike me as a great buy).

The emoluments one is curious. Up to £567k but highest individual is £142k. I seem to recall Davies and Porter being appointed directors at the same time as JS, so there's two. And we can rule Stu out.

That does rather imply that, unless by some quirk of fate JW, GD, SP and TB all got roughly the same amount for various reasons, another director got something.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

So this discussion has made me actually look at the accounts. The ‘directors emoluments’ is interesting. Ffs.
It look as though we either paid a whack load to Birch as compensation for him ‘resigning to go to Spurs’ or we are paying someone else something (and by someone else, that could only realistically be Silverstein or Porter as no one was getting paid before and they were the only ones that joined in the year - it will be a pay out to Birch though I would bet).
We may help our financial situation if we stopped shelling out loads every year for sacking mangers, directors of football, assistants etc etc.
On the player front, it was Cooper / Scott who identified both Piroe and Obafemi - Cooper knew both from days at under 17 level. Yet to see the new regime quality (ignoring the keeper who, to be frank, doesn’t strike me as a great buy).

The emoluments one is curious. Up to £567k but highest individual is £142k. I seem to recall Davies and Porter being appointed directors at the same time as JS, so there's two. And we can rule Stu out.

That does rather imply that, unless by some quirk of fate JW, GD, SP and TB all got roughly the same amount for various reasons, another director got something.

Davies isn’t a director. He’s Secretary to the Board but not on the board. So not included.

Not sure from memory whether Birch’s payoff would be disclosed as ‘highest paid director’. The pay off would be in the total figure but I’ve a feeling it wouldn’t be disclosed as highest if it was higher than, for example, JW’s pay. But h’s pay is shown for the year before and that plus JW gives roughly the figure.

 

[Uxy]

The emoluments one is curious. Up to £567k but highest individual is £142k. I seem to recall Davies and Porter being appointed directors at the same time as JS, so there's two. And we can rule Stu out.

That does rather imply that, unless by some quirk of fate JW, GD, SP and TB all got roughly the same amount for various reasons, another director got something.

Davies isn’t a director. He’s Secretary to the Board but not on the board. So not included.

Not sure from memory whether Birch’s payoff would be disclosed as ‘highest paid director’. The pay off would be in the total figure but I’ve a feeling it wouldn’t be disclosed as highest if it was higher than, for example, JW’s pay. But h’s pay is shown for the year before and that plus JW gives roughly the figure.

Agree not showing up at CH as director but am sure he was appointed as one at the board meeting. Remember the subsequent statement if nothing else.

Either way, another question to get answers on, and I'm sure they'll be forthcoming

 

[Londonlisa2001]

Davies isn’t a director. He’s Secretary to the Board but not on the board. So not included.

Not sure from memory whether Birch’s payoff would be disclosed as ‘highest paid director’. The pay off would be in the total figure but I’ve a feeling it wouldn’t be disclosed as highest if it was higher than, for example, JW’s pay. But h’s pay is shown for the year before and that plus JW gives roughly the figure.

Agree not showing up at CH as director but am sure he was appointed as one at the board meeting. Remember the subsequent statement if nothing else.

Either way, another question to get answers on, and I'm sure they'll be forthcoming

probably one of those ‘Director’ things who is actually not a board director. Definitely not at the time of these accounts anyway as not listed as a director in the financial statements so won’t be included.

Yes, I imagine people will be all over it….

The split between the liability and equity elements of the convertible note is interesting as well.

 

[Niigata Jack]

If only the Yanks had taken a bit of a gamble and backed Cooper in January 21 and brought in the player or two he wanted, which might have seen us in the Premiership with the riches that have brought, its an if and a big IF at that.

The sell outs said that these yanks could sustain us, but that statement like many of their other statements is false, never mind as long as the Trust can sit in comfort and watch the games, although the Champers looks like its gonna be fizzy pop from here on in.

The thing is though the likes of Piroe and Downes could be sold for a third or half of their value and worth.

Cheers Sellouts.

 

[JackSomething]

If only the Yanks had taken a bit of a gamble and backed Cooper in January 21 and brought in the player or two he wanted, which might have seen us in the Premiership with the riches that have brought, its an if and a big IF at that.

The sell outs said that these yanks could sustain us, but that statement like many of their other statements is false, never mind as long as the Trust can sit in comfort and watch the games, although the Champers looks like its gonna be fizzy pop from here on in.

The thing is though the likes of Piroe and Downes could be sold for a third or half of their value and worth.

Cheers Sellouts.

If they had taken that gamble and hadn't got promoted, we'd be in an even worse state. That kind of thinking is what leads to spending £120m on transfers in 2 years in a desperate attempt to stay in the PL. When it failed, we were left in the financial position we now find ourselves in.