It's that time of year again!

[Risso]

Anyway:

Turnover down to £80.3m from £92m.

Operating expenses down to £138m from £159m.

This gives an operating loss of £58m compared to £66m last year.

Profit from player sales was £27m compared to £19m last year.

Lerner then wrote off £20.5m, including £6m charged this year, giving a net movment of £14m.

This takes us down to a loss of £17.7m compared to £54m last year.  Obviously though, he won't be able to write off the accumulated interest every year, and that operating loss of £58m is still huge and very worrying.

The overall deficit in the accounts has risen from £20m to £32m.

All elements of turnover in the year decreased. matchday was down from £21.5m to £19.9m, TV down from £53.8m to £46.7m, and commercial down from £16.7m to £13.7m.  Wages decreased from £83m to £70m.  The percentage of wages to turnover has therefore decreased from 90.6% to 86.6%.

[itbrvilla]

Anyway:

Turnover down to £80.3m from £92m.

Operating expenses down to £138m from £159m.

This gives an operating loss of £58m compared to £66m last year.

Profit from player sales was £27m compared to £19m last year.

Lerner then wrote off £20.5m, including £6m charged this year, giving a net movment of £14m.

This takes us down to a loss of £17.7m compared to £54m last year.  Obviously though, he won't be able to write off the accumulated interest every year, and that operating loss of £58m is still huge and very worrying.

The overall deficit in the accounts has risen from £20m to £32m.

All elements of turnover in the year decreased. matchday was down from £21.5m to £19.9m, TV down from £53.8m to £46.7m, and commercial down from £16.7m to £13.7m.  Wages decreased from £83m to £70m.  The percentage of wages to turnover has therefore decreased from 90.6% to 86.6%.

What will all this mean if we are in the Championship next season?

[Risso]

Well, turnover will plummet and the losses would worsen.

Another point from the accounts is that it looks like it cost nearly £6m to pot McLeish and co.

[Concrete John]

86.6% wages/turnover is still too high.  I'd guess it improves to a decent level, one where we could spend again, with the new Sky money.  IF we stay up, of course.

Remind me again when this is calculated to and who we've lost since?

[pauliewalnuts]

Well, turnover will plummet and the losses would worsen.

Another point from the accounts is that it looks like it cost nearly £6m to pot McLeish and co.

Worth a moment's thought for those so keen to pot Lambert, innit?




*wink*

[Risso]

Well, turnover will plummet and the losses would worsen.

Another point from the accounts is that it looks like it cost nearly £6m to pot McLeish and co.

Worth a moment's thought for those so keen to pot Lambert, innit?




*wink*

Yes, they should have kept McLeish after all.  Not only would we have saved £6m, but we'd also be doing better in the league!

*winkbackatcha*

[Risso]

86.6% wages/turnover is still too high.  I'd guess it improves to a decent level, one where we could spend again, with the new Sky money.  IF we stay up, of course.

Remind me again when this is calculated to and who we've lost since?

31 May 2012 is the accounting end date.  We lost Cuellar and Collins plus Warnock in January, so don't think there will be any big improvement.

[supertom]

I still cannot fathom how we had to pay McLeish 6 million to fuck him off. He's been rewarded for gross incompetence. We should have been well within our rights to fuck him off. But there you go, that's the state of football these days. A complete and utter pile of wank.

[Risso]

I still cannot fathom how we had to pay McLeish 6 million to fuck him off. He's been rewarded for gross incompetence. We should have been well within our rights to fuck him off. But there you go, that's the state of football these days. A complete and utter pile of wank.

I don't know why football clubs don't put more restrictions in the contracts on a case by case basis.  If you were offering Mourinho a job I don't think he'd take too kindly to a clause that said if he performed badly he'd be sacked without compensation, but if you're offering a no hoper like McLeish a job after relegation surely they could be more bullish?  It may be against employment law I suppose, but it seems absolutely ridiculous that a club like Villa has lost £18m in two years in paying off managers.

[Clampy]

I still cannot fathom how we had to pay McLeish 6 million to fuck him off. He's been rewarded for gross incompetence. We should have been well within our rights to fuck him off. But there you go, that's the state of football these days. A complete and utter pile of wank.

I don't know why football clubs don't put more restrictions in the contracts on a case by case basis.  If you were offering Mourinho a job I don't think he'd take too kindly to a clause that said if he performed badly he'd be sacked without compensation, but if you're offering a no hoper like McLeish a job after relegation surely they could be more bullish?  It may be against employment law I suppose, but it seems absolutely ridiculous that a club like Villa has lost £18m in two years in paying off managers.

He was unfortunate in having to pay off Houiller. He should'nt have employed McLeish in the first place.

[pauliewalnuts]

Even a year and a bit on, I can't even begin to fathom the sheer stupidity that got Lerner to appoint McLeish.

A truly mind boggling act of utter stupidity.

[Greg N'Ash]

Can't see us ever breaking even the way things are going, even if we get the wages bill down further. Thing is its probably risen from 70m since those accounts.

[Concrete John]

I still cannot fathom how we had to pay McLeish 6 million to fuck him off. He's been rewarded for gross incompetence. We should have been well within our rights to fuck him off. But there you go, that's the state of football these days. A complete and utter pile of wank.

I don't know why football clubs don't put more restrictions in the contracts on a case by case basis.  If you were offering Mourinho a job I don't think he'd take too kindly to a clause that said if he performed badly he'd be sacked without compensation, but if you're offering a no hoper like McLeish a job after relegation surely they could be more bullish?  It may be against employment law I suppose, but it seems absolutely ridiculous that a club like Villa has lost £18m in two years in paying off managers.

I think the problem is they work both ways.  Any club will appoint a manager as they think he'll do well.  And if he does well, the vultures will circle.  A strong contract allows them to defend against such approaches, but if you add a 'we can sack you if you're shit' clause, then the manager and his agent will look to negotiate the opposite, which is a release clause if a certain level of club come in for him.

[Concrete John]

86.6% wages/turnover is still too high.  I'd guess it improves to a decent level, one where we could spend again, with the new Sky money.  IF we stay up, of course.

Remind me again when this is calculated to and who we've lost since?

31 May 2012 is the accounting end date.  We lost Cuellar and Collins plus Warnock in January, so don't think there will be any big improvement.

And Heskey.

I reckon that's about £10m a year.

[Greg N'Ash]

Thing is the drop in the wage bill seems to be swallowed up by the drop in turnover. Ever decreasing circles.