Jump to content

Finances - separate thread


javeajag
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some may have seen the SwissRamble analysis on Rangers results which also included data on other clubs including us......mind boggling that our wage to turnover ratio was 70 % to under achieve so much 

this chart is illuminating and depressing but to spend £700k more than Kilmarnock and get relegated is hard to believe 

 

A72696DA-2754-4A07-99E7-0873BDF46653.jpeg

CA914992-A8EE-4013-8D5D-6C5618D9D255.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I reading this wrong? In 2016/17 we paid out £700K more on wages than Killie. We finished top six and Killie were 8th. If  for argument sake the basic wages were the same then £700K differential doesn't look out of place. We would pay out more on win bonuses prior to the split plus the players would be on a one off bonus for reaching the top six. 

Where we could've come a cropper, in wage comparison at least, is on basic pay post split where performances dipped.  Then again Killie went out the League Cup at the group stage and the Scottish Cup at first game. We got thru the LC group stage and went out the Scottish after two wins. 

We really need to see the following season's figures. I suspect they'll make grim reading. Given the disparate fortunes of the two clubs, and if indeed the basic wages are the same, Killie should've paid out maybe about £1m more than us.

Btw whatever the wage bill, as said many times before, the cost centres will differ from club to club. Free or low cost accommodation arrangements, cars, travel expenses and many other "perks" come into play. So you'll never get a true picture.  I don't know if the true Wage/Turnover figure is/was running at 70%. If so, if not unsustainable it's certainly hard to sustain. If it reflects one season then I think our drastic cuts back in May/June this year will have offset that trend.

Edited by lady-isobel-barnett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The figures in the graphs above relate to our accounts for period ended 31st May 2017 so that was basically the 16/17 season which saw us finish 6th in the Premiership. It was reported on here after that AGM that the players did receive a large bonus for this. The most recent set of accounts (to 31st May 2018) are out and as javeajag posted we made a profit of approx £340,000. I don't know what the wages to turnover ratio shows for that period - perhaps javeajag could help?

The AGM is next week so hopefully the club will be able to clarify everything at that point. What is important moving forward is that they can still keep the books fairly balanced whilst we attempt to back to the top flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well income of the club increased to £4.5 up to Msy 2017 and there is no reason to assume there was a drastic reduction in players wages indeed probably at best we kept them flat but 

1 if you assume the 70% was the ratio then that gives you £3.15m

2 if you assume we reduced it to 60% then that gives you £2.7m

3 keeping it flat at £2.9m sits at c 65%

two comments that ratio at over 60% is not sustainable particularly as revenue declines in the championship

and with the budget Archie has last year he really did screw up 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Well income of the club increased to £4.5 up to Msy 2017 and there is no reason to assume there was a drastic reduction in players wages indeed probably at best we kept them flat but 

1 if you assume the 70% was the ratio then that gives you £3.15m

2 if you assume we reduced it to 60% then that gives you £2.7m

3 keeping it flat at £2.9m sits at c 65%

two comments that ratio at over 60% is not sustainable particularly as revenue declines in the championship

and with the budget Archie has last year he really did screw up 

Is the income of £4.5M not for the period ended May 2018?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Wayfarer said:

I'm assuming the 'wages' figures relate to all directly employed by a club so will include non-playing staff like mangers, coaches, office employees etc?

That is as I understand it given the average number of monthly employees in the last set of accounts on Companies House is 83.

I think when people read about percentage of turnover on wages some do think it is just the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wages to turnover ratio was lower in 2017/8. It is 61%. 

The total wages are almost 100k lower. Additionally there are nearly 30k higher ceo costs (full year at higher salary). So that’s about 120k lower on other wages on a like for like basis. 

The story doesn’t end there. We have 95 employees in 2018. 60 being non playing staff. That’s 12 higher than the previous year but with same number of playing staff. As these  extra staff need paid something,  that would further reduce the playing budget on the year before surely.  If we even assume these additional employees cost a modest 5k per annum each, and everything else is the same that would still mean the playing budget was down 180k between 2017 and 2018. 

What is staggering is we have a bloated non playing staff - more employees than Kilmarnock and hibs! - yet we Kept the staff in place post relegation. That must have further shrunk the playing Budget this year to support non playing staff.   

Its not popular but it’s easy to begin to feel a degree of sympathy for Archie. 

Finishes top 6  gets his budget cut to  fund  non playing staff expansion  then get relegated and have budget cut further to keep those non playing staff in place 

to put this in context, we have more non playing staff than Hamilton have TOTAL staff including players  (and Falkirk and Morton)  we also have 23 more staff than Dundee United and 18 more than Kilmarnock  

 

Edited by jaf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fawlty Towers said:

I am not sure about these staff numbers as we don't have a big office staff. There are support staff like sports scientists, etc but unless they are including everyone employed within the youth academy as well I can't see how we have 60 non-playing staff :unknw:

Per the 2018 accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jaf said:

The wages to turnover ratio was lower in 2017/8. It is 61%. 

The total wages are almost 100k lower. Additionally there are nearly 30k higher ceo costs (full year at higher salary). So that’s about 120k lower on other wages on a like for like basis. 

The story doesn’t end there. We have 95 employees in 2018. 60 being non playing staff. That’s 12 higher than the previous year but with same number of playing staff. As these  extra staff need paid something,  that would further reduce the playing budget on the year before surely.  If we even assume these additional employees cost a modest 5k per annum each, and everything else is the same that would still mean the playing budget was down 180k between 2017 and 2018. 

What is staggering is we have a bloated non playing staff - more employees than Kilmarnock and hibs! - yet we Kept the staff in place post relegation. That must have further shrunk the playing Budget this year to support non playing staff.   

Its not popular but it’s easy to begin to feel a degree of sympathy for Archie. 

Finishes top 6  gets his budget cut to  fund  non playing staff expansion  then get relegated and have budget cut further to keep those non playing staff in place 

to put this in context, we have more non playing staff than Hamilton have TOTAL staff including players  (and Falkirk and Morton)  we also have 23 more staff than Dundee United and 18 more than Kilmarnock  

 

Can’t see how we have 95 staff unless you include Saturday only or the a ade y coaches 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jaf said:

Per the 2018 accounts.

Should have made it clear that I was not doubting what you had posted. My issue is that I can't understand how the non playing staff numbers have been so large over recent years. If I go through in my head who works in the office, the management team, backroom staff and playing squad including reserves it does not come to 60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fawlty Towers said:

I am not sure about these staff numbers as we don't have a big office staff. There are support staff like sports scientists, etc but unless they are including everyone employed within the youth academy as well I can't see how we have 60 non-playing staff :unknw:

I think the youth academy comes under Weir Academy which isn’t paid by Thistle it’s paid by the Weirs.

Our office staff is minimum, we didn’t have a huge coaching staff nor the biggest squad, this makes the figures even more worrying.

Remembering our “Profit “ for tha latest accounts, we also had Top 6 prize money, Money for Celtic being in Champions League, plus Liam Lindsay’s transfer fee. All of those wouldn’t have been budgeted for. The 3 mentioned will come to at least £600k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fawlty Towers said:

Should have made it clear that I was not doubting what you had posted. My issue is that I can't understand how the non playing staff numbers have been so large over recent years. If I go through in my head who works in the office, the management team, backroom staff and playing squad including reserves it does not come to 60.

Did they not take the Hospitality and Catering back in-house ?, even then it seems a lot of staff 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

I think the youth academy comes under Weir Academy which isn’t paid by Thistle it’s paid by the Weirs.

Our office staff is minimum, we didn’t have a huge coaching staff nor the biggest squad, this makes the figures even more worrying.

Remembering our “Profit “ for tha latest accounts, we also had Top 6 prize money, Money for Celtic being in Champions League, plus Liam Lindsay’s transfer fee. All of those wouldn’t have been budgeted for. The 3 mentioned will come to at least £600k

Would the top 6 prize money not have been included in 16/17 accounts and was there not champions league money in that season too ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Did they not take the Hospitality and Catering back in-house ?, even then it seems a lot of staff 

Possibly this 60 staff could include turnstile operators (if paid), hospitality &catering (if in house) plus office staff.

Of those 60 maybe 50 only work 5 hours every other week (Home games), which is a lot more than our defense does currently 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lenziejag said:

Would the top 6 prize money not have been included in 16/17 accounts and was there not champions league money in that season too ?

Top 6 was May 2017 so would be in 17/18 accounts, there was champions league money both years, but more in 17/18 accounts as Celtic got through the group stages that year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...