Uncategorized

£60 Million Plus?

|
Image for £60 Million Plus?

‘Where’s the Money Gone?’ some of us are asking but Couch Potato from the Couch would like to know first how much actually came in?

‘Where’s the Money Gone?’ some of us are asking but Couch Potato from the Couch would like to know first how much actually came in?

We let him loose below

**************************************

Yeah, I know, I’m supposed to be writing an opera about *oyley.

But every time I get started, this irritating tune gets in my head. From 70s poppers Middle of the Road, it’s called ‘Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep’, with it’s oft-repeated line ‘where’s your mama gone’.

Only when I hear it now, it’s ‘where’s the money gone’. And when I hear it, it’s about Burnley Football Club’s thus far sole season on the gravy train of the Premier League… when we were going to make so much money life would never be the same again. Right?

Well, maybe. But there’s been more than a few comments on this site that we should be flashing it about a bit more than we are doing, on new players and higher salaries. And since we’re not, the folk who post those comments sometimes ask ‘where’s the money gone?’

I’m going to get to that. I’m even going to write a piece about whether or not we went down stronger. And one on the amazing story of Brendan Flood’s financial involvement with our club.

But today, I’m just going to try to work out how much money there was.

And while I am doing that, as in the rest of this mini-series of Views from the Couch, there are two things you have to keep in mind. First that I have not got all the facts. Second, that if you join in debate in the thread that follows, and share your insights and knowledge, then it’s possible we’ll all make each other a little bit wiser. Okay? Here we go…

In the Introduction to his typically readable latest book – Entertainment, Heroes and Villains – Dave Thomas writes about the May 2009 Wembley win engineered by *oyley that ‘he brought a £60million payday at a time the club could barely pay its bills and only more directors’ loans kept the ship afloat in the weeks leading up to Wembley. Another £48million was assured from parachute payments after that.’

Dave Thomas knows what he talking about, so these figues must be right. Right? I have the highest admiration for Dave, and all his books. But I think it’s possible he’s got it wrong here. And here’s why…

1. I had always understood that the £60 million was only ever a made-up number, cobbled together by some newspaper or other, and possibly by one that doesn’t even exist any more. I don’t know. But I do know that it wasn’t a fixed sum that all Wembley winners were guaranteed.

2. I had always understood that it included every piece of extra income you would get from one season in the PL: extra gate money, TV money, prize money… and the parachute payments if you were relegated at the first time of asking.

3. When Swansea won at Wembley in May 2011, this headline number had been increased to £90 million. Now why should that be? My thoughts are that it was partly because the SKY money has gone up (Is Rupert Murdoch so bad if he gives us all this money?), and partly because the parachute payments were increased at the last PL meeting that Bfc attended.

4. If I am right about that, the £60million we ‘won’ definitely did include the parachute payments. They were not, after all, on top of the £60million.

5. But we’d have got more than £60million because the parachute payments had gone up, right? I wish I could be so sure. But every time I have read news reports of the meeting when the payments were put up, the wording has been ambiguous as to whether they were going up for clubs relegated that season (us), or starting with those relegated the next season (not us).

6. Regardless, there are a few other things to remember. Like the fact that you don’t get all the parachute money straight away. It’s spread over 3 years. Or maybe 4. And the extra money that you get from extra b*ms on seats won’t be as much if you’ve only got room for an extra 6,000, as opposed to having room for an extra 10,000. Which could go against us as we tot up our winnings.

7. Anyway, here’s what I reckon is the clincher. If you’re of a nervous disposition, you might want to sit down… and dig out your copy of When the Ball Moves Issue 86 (What? You didn’t buy one? Shame on you.) and read the article on pages 50 and 51 by Steve Kelly. As Steve puts it about himself ‘my business involves running a management consultancy that gives financial advice to the NHS, so while I now *ugger all about football, I do know about money’.

8. And what Steve says in his neatly set out extracts from the accounts of Burnley Football Club, for the 2009/10 year, is that the club’s income that PL year was £46 million, and the income in the year we got promoted was £11million.

And that, dear reader, means that the extra income we got in our PL year was £35million, not £60million; and that therefore Dave Thomas’s Introduction in his book Entertainment, Heroes and Villains is wrong on this point.

Sorry Dave, but I have plugged your book twice, and I am getting a lot out of reading it, and I recommend that everyone else reads it too.

So. What does anyone think about this article? And what can you share to help us all be a little bit wiser about what money came in… before we turn our attention in a future article about where it’s gone?

Couch Potato

Share this article

Vital BFC Editor

26 comments

  • hollinsclaret says:

    This is a really illuminating thread well done all! CpC with regards borrowing monies my suggestion is based on strategy that being should we be going all guns blazing to gain promotion in the season preceding our relegation to the Championship and if that didn’t work (which it didn’t) is this the season where we really must have a dam good go almost at all costs!….. we know the future incomes crash after this season and rather than buy players ( not that we have done much of that) we may need to sell a few next season, so when I say borrow against future earnings this is what I mean ? clearly that’s not going to happen and an exercise of managing incomes within the fixed seasons looks like it will be embarked upon I’m not sure I agree with such prudence for me it a massive season for I fear without promotion we will become another mid table championship side at best ! I am confident there isn’t a scandal on the expenses side either, although I’m sure there will be a few decisions that raise an eye brow or two, like you I believe BK has done an amazing job but perhaps its time for a different approach to the clubs strategy for me we seriously lack ambition at the moment and the constrains of such prudent financial management of the clubs finances seems for me to be constraining us far to much! I’m not saying we should be betting the farm but we really need to be more positive in our approach

  • RickersTwickers says:

    Not so much would realise Welsh, more COULD realise. £30m, £60 or £90million are all figures put up by tabloids in a world where importance is measured by finances. Some clowns think that promotion means a cheque for a fat sum arrives on the doorstep the next day – it clearly doesn’t work like that. You’re right that the money generated by a move into a higher league comes from increased TV money, final position achieved and commercial activity off the field – which, as we know, is very limited at Turf Moor given that the corporate arm of the club is light years behind other outfits. Granted the parachute payments come into play and it is those that form an increasingly significant part of the package in our case.

  • turfmanphil says:

    I would put it more stronger than that! The parachute payments are keeping us afloat. If it were not for them we would be in dire financial straits,which for a club that prides itself in not going into debt and because of it ‘going down stronger’ is nothing short of a bloody disgrace!

  • Couch Potato says:

    Saw Darren Bentley and his CPlayer assistant Nicola down at Torquay Marina yesterday morning (No! He wasn’t looking for a boat on which to escape after his Friday night Twitter that the Mears/Eagles story was a ridiculous rumour! Stay off the Twitter, Darren. Stay off the Twitter.) We did discuss that, and Mears/Eagles, but it was before he had got the full news. We discussed much else besides. It was a much appreciated 10 minutes. For this thread he confirmed that the para payments were 18, 14, 8, 8. The 8 and 8 come in the next 2 years.

  • CrosspoolClarets says:

    Excellent undercover journalism Couch! So my estimate of £18m, £14m, £8m, £8m was spot on – miracles do happen. It probably was a £90m game for us at Wembley when you also factor in profits from players signed in the Prem (Mears, Fletcher). But seeing as we clearly didn’t go down stronger, the key therefore is how this £90m was chosen to be spent…..with that Couch…..I’ll await your future article with interest! (though being in France for 3 weeks from next Wednesday I am likely to miss the fun!)

  • aggi says:

    Some of you may find this interesting, a slightly more detailed account of the 2010 accounts together with links to 2010 and 2009 accounts.

    http://www.thefootballnetwork.net/boards/read/s37.htm?38,12003519,12003519

Comments are closed.