Premiership finances revealed - guess the largest losses?

[fleabane]

http://tinyurl.com/89jx2np

Good news that 4 clubs are now profitable, but how do you square the different amounts on staff salaries and wages?

[h's dad]

Interesting article. Not sure what you mean about different payroll bills from this article. The only numbers I can see are Tigers at 41% of turnover, so £8.0 million and Saracens at 72.9% so £5.5 million. You would expect Tigers’ payroll costs to be higher as they have their own ground and presumably employ a substantial number of staff to maintain and manage whereas I assume Saracens pay a substantial amount in non-payroll costs to Watford FC to do the job for them. I would imagine both clubs’ declared payroll costs for players to be pretty much at the salary cap.

I may have missed something in the article or be completely wrong of course and would welcome any enlightenment.


And yes, I do know how sad I am.

[CitizenSmiff]

It's nice to have hard facts to rag on Saracens fans with- how awfully tedious does a team have to be to lose £5.6m in a league with a restrictively low salary cap, and they don't even maintain their own grounds.

[tac106]

Interesting article. I look at company filings a lot for my job and had actually been putting together a few comparisons on rugby club finances (very sad, I know) over the last few weeks.

For years ended 30 June 2011

Tigers paid out £7.1m in wages (with 79 playing/coaching staff, and 68 others), marginally less than in 2010.

Sarries paid out £6.035m (with 77 players/coaches, and 23 others), up by ~£0.5m with no real increase in overall staff numbers.

In directors report, Nigel Wray says losses "simply not sustainable in the long-term."

To CitizenSmith, the very reason why Sarries make no money is because they don't own their own ground, and all the revenue streams that brings.

[fleabane]

I was trying to point out the percentage difference - and just look at Premiership football's percentages - virtually all clubs at the Sarries level or above. The danger with Sarries, and maybe Bath too, (sugardaddy in tow), is that sooner or later the emphasis will be on the financial returns (a la MU), rather than on continuing to financially support the club.

Sarries are not a sustainable asset at this level for any organisation. The article says the 72% is "alarming". It is that which I was trying to highlight. I do not see how "controlling costs" - in Sarries case the most glaring cost is salaries - can realistically resolve the losses, and gaining revenue from other sources, even in a redeveloped Copthill is a daydream.

If McCafferty is serious, he would be proposing a target for all clubs to break even in 3 or 5 years time.

[Bill W (2)]

If McCafferty is serious, he would be proposing a target for all clubs to break even in 3 or 5 years time.

Concur. But he isn't serious. As in France Sugar Daddies are a regretable necessity!

[sjm]

a bit scary for sarries as at the same time i read this the ceo said he would like to see the salary cap raised would that mean more losses?

[Bill W (2)]

a bit scary for sarries as at the same time i read this the ceo said he would like to see the salary cap raised would that mean more losses?

Not sure Sarries backers see them as losses.

With a planned 10,000 seater stadium even with the odd game at Wembley or Twickers even if they are successful on the field of play no way are they ever going to make money in the UK. And the liklihood of establishing themselves as a "global brand" is remote.

At best, perhaps, am ego trip. Of course I would not suggest money laundering!

[kingol22]

For all this money Sarries have won one title in 3 years and have not looked like challenging in europe. Another couple of years without more titles and the backers will get board. Then they will plummet down the table.

[Bill W (2)]

The backers may not get bored. They get to stage "high profile" games at Wembley and Twickers with associated hospitality. £5M a drop in the ocean - others have spent more on a wedding anniversay, 21st birthday party or a bar mitzvah!

[drc_007]

I see Wasps have not reported their finances for this year. Perhaps they should be docked a couple of points for lateness?