Sheffield United have chosen profit over fans with a season of record-breakingly bad football

[jt64]

PL commercial income for United, including sponsorship and tickets is about £20m

I don't know what sort of differential we had in sponsorship between seasons in one tier and the other, but on tickets it's worth pointing out that season ticket costs have for all intents and purposes been static between the two leagues, we sell a lot of them, as such the only real differences are the minimal amount of uplift we would get on pay on the gate tickets - for which we weren't exactly cheap in the Championship as a starting point, and we're probably charging on average less to away fans because of the £30 cap

 

[Sean Thornton]

Because it's abundantly clear that the asking price for United is far higher than £115m and it's putting people off.


Nowhere near £500m. The PL figure is closer to £400m (£132m 19/20*; £126m 20/21*, assume £130m this season) and we'll have incurred running costs of £375m in that time.

*Both restated to 12 months

But Pedro knows how a football club should be run.

If he’s advising Mester Chansiri you can see why they’ve hit problems

 

[Pedro's Winger]

The three you mention have very rich owners and Brentford have for years been run unlike us by people who know what they are doing .They have made loads of money selling players at huge profits but at the same time having a superb youth set up also scouting system second to none which allows them to be a selling club but always having a better player to fill the gap . Can not see Ipswich making an impact like the other three mainly because the three are established in the prem ,having said that Bournemouth are starting to wobble . Brentford are the ideal role model for small clubs but the type of owners they have are few and far between ,rich and they know what they are doing ,not many like that .

The scouting and selling at Brighton have happened regardless of owner wealth, it's an example of good management.
Either way, should the income we've had over recent years led to the current performances on the pitch? Smarter management would make a big difference.
Much of it is down to a lack of direction from the top but there is also a sense of defeatism in the team's management which shouldn't be acceptable.
It's also contagious and the idea that we simply sit out a season losing virtually every match and then turn the winning tap on next August is far fetched.

 

[Carlton Blade]

Aye, so close to £500m in total. The argument would still stand if it were £400m - it's about being smarter with money and management.

Regardless of the actual income figure, it doesn't exceed the outgoings figure. So you would have to choose to have spent less elsewhere

 

[Carlton Blade]

I don't know what sort of differential we had in sponsorship between seasons in one tier and the other, but on tickets it's worth pointing out that season ticket costs have for all intents and purposes been static between the two leagues, we sell a lot of them, as such the only real differences are the minimal amount of uplift we would get on pay on the gate tickets - for which we weren't exactly cheap in the Championship as a starting point, and we're probably charging on average less to away fans because of the £30 cap

Looking at the accounts, non-TV income seems to sit around £9m in the Championship and £20m in the PL. Be interesting to see if the 23/24 season has better sponsorship numbers than 19/20 as, although the team is worse the 'brand' is certainly more well known

 

[Pedro's Winger]

But Pedro knows how a football club should be run.

If he’s advising Mester Chansiri you can see why they’ve hit problems

It isn't difficult to recognise United haven't used the increased income well and could have used it better or that we should be more competitive on the pitch.
Pretty sure lots of people recognise why some other clubs without wealthy owners have done well regardless.

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Regardless of the actual income figure, it doesn't exceed the outgoings figure. So you would have to choose to have spent less elsewhere

Not disagreeing, merely pointing out the level of income and what it hasn't been spent on.

 

[BLADES1988]

Could be worse tho eh. Just look at those scrubbers in S6, begging buckets out again, chairman expecting fans to pay player wages etc. We may go down with fuck all points, but it could have been this situation in the championship, with no players, no money and an extremely bleak outlook.

Not saying im enjoying it, but the club is safe again. That'll do for now.

 

[Balham Blade]

Also they wouldn't be getting V.F.M.

Of course not. That's my point; and that's why no-one is biting.

Perhaps Pedro is also factoring in the parachute payments, but only they'll know that

If they are the picture gets worse. We lost a lot of money in the two years in the Championship.

Meant in total, including attendance and sponsorship monies.

Aye, so close to £500m in total. The argument would still stand if it were £400m - it's about being smarter with money and management.

Nope, the £400m is gross turnover taken from the published accounts. TV revenue accounts for about £220m; the equal share another £100m. I've made my 23/24 estimates in that last 15 minutes so haven't researched the TV deals; I've just taken the figures from our last PL stints.



Here's lots of numbers explaining that. Over 5 years I would guess we'll breakeven which is about the best we can expect without an owner willing or capable of underwriting us by £50m+ per season as most other PL teams have. The profit this year is almost entirely driven by selling Berge and Ndiaye for far in excess of their carrying values (£11m profit for Berge; £20m for Ndiaye).

The scouting and selling at Brighton have happened regardless of owner wealth, it's an example of good management.

Brighton owed Tony Bloom over £400m at the last published accounts. They can do what they've done because they have the backer to let them play the long game. It's paying off for them now but it's needed nearly half a billion pounds to get them there. Fair play to them.

 

[JPBrods]

Good article, dreadful headline.

 

[Carlton Blade]

Not disagreeing, merely pointing out the level of income and what it hasn't been spent on.

If you include this season, since 19/20 we will have received about £375m more in TV money than if we'd never been promoted in 18/19 (It's about £8m a season in the Championship). That works out at £75m a season. £100m on fees reduces that to £55m a season. 2 promotions with estimated bonuses of £40m combined, now we are at £47m a season.

Without even touching on wages, other operating costs, inflation, paying Covid money back etc you can see the surplus just disappear. There's a reason the only club in the country who built their own stadium that's 1) good and 2) didn't come with loads of help is Spurs, the closest thing to a real world business that top football has

 

[Balham Blade]

If you include this season, since 19/20 we will have received about £375m more in TV money than if we'd never been promoted in 18/19 (It's about £8m a season in the Championship). That works out at £75m a season. £100m on fees reduces that to £55m a season. 2 promotions with estimated bonuses of £40m combined, now we are at £47m a season.

Without even touching on wages, other operating costs, inflation, paying Covid money back etc you can see the surplus just disappear. There's a reason the only club in the country who built their own stadium that's 1) good and 2) didn't come with loads of help is Spurs, the closest thing to a real world business that top football has

Spurs, who also incurred a billion of debt building said stadium and are probably bricking the next refinancing given the current lending environment

 

[Carlton Blade]

Spurs, who also incurred a billion of debt building said stadium and are probably bricking the next refinancing given the current lending environment

But that's at least a real world problem. The real world is panicking about interest rates and Spurs are part of that. United are too, they know they can't borrow any more money

 

[Sean Thornton]

Perhaps Pedro is also factoring in the parachute payments, but only they'll know that

He said three PL years.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Aye, so close to £500m in total. The argument would still stand if it were £400m - it's about being smarter with money and management.

Still no. Didn’t Balham Blade quote total income figures?

£100m out and spouts about being smarter with money.

 

[Bell4]

In the short term it must be possible to put in more competitive performances than we currently are.
Losing is one thing but losing in a gutless, defeatist manner is another.
Realising potential isn't just about spending money, as some clubs in the Prem have demonstrated. It's about being organised, smart with transfers and contracts, developing youth and so on.
The notion we just accept mediocrity until a fantasy sugar daddy arrives is daft.
There's a real danger here that we are sleepwalking into an acceptance that United can't succeed like other clubs have because we're just United and that's what we do.
That breeds apathy, disinterest, falling crowds and a sense of 'what's the point' that could cause much longer lasting damage.

The term is ..Learned Helplessness...

 

[Snowflake]

But Pedro knows how a football club should be run.

If he’s advising Mester Chansiri you can see why they’ve hit problems

Surely it’s not a problem to raise £2m from such a large fan base. 10p each should secure it.

 

[JJBlade]

What profit ????
We'll be in the Championship next season and complaining about being skint again
Or if three clubs get a 35 point deduction we might be in the Prem next season and still be skint

 

[petcharlie]

The scouting and selling at Brighton have happened regardless of owner wealth, it's an example of good management.
Either way, should the income we've had over recent years led to the current performances on the pitch? Smarter management would make a big difference.
Much of it is down to a lack of direction from the top but there is also a sense of defeatism in the team's management which shouldn't be acceptable.
It's also contagious and the idea that we simply sit out a season losing virtually every match and then turn the winning tap on next August is far fetched.

Yes I can agree with most of that .You are right when you say the income we have had over recent years should have seen us in good financial nick compared to other Championship and lower prem clubs if we had been managed right . We should thank the managers (yes including Wilder) for getting us from the depth of league one to the promised land of the prem . Three years out of five in the prem we should be ok . Admitably we have had to deal with terrible injury list and covid but we are told most revenue comes from other sauces rather than gate money in the prem . I can also understand the sense of defeatism which if true is coming from the manager ,he has had to put up with so much crap from above and anyone in his position must get so frustrated after having to deal with it month after month after month . He has done his job its others that have let him done and the club . As I have said before I could probably accept the lack of investment in the team if the prem cash is going towards making the club sound in a financial way . I wonder if that's true? Time will tell.

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Of course not. That's my point; and that's why no-one is biting.


If they are the picture gets worse. We lost a lot of money in the two years in the Championship.




Nope, the £400m is gross turnover taken from the published accounts. TV revenue accounts for about £220m; the equal share another £100m. I've made my 23/24 estimates in that last 15 minutes so haven't researched the TV deals; I've just taken the figures from our last PL stints.

View attachment 173813

Here's lots of numbers explaining that. Over 5 years I would guess we'll breakeven which is about the best we can expect without an owner willing or capable of underwriting us by £50m+ per season as most other PL teams have. The profit this year is almost entirely driven by selling Berge and Ndiaye for far in excess of their carrying values (£11m profit for Berge; £20m for Ndiaye).


Brighton owed Tony Bloom over £400m at the last published accounts. They can do what they've done because they have the backer to let them play the long game. It's paying off for them now but it's needed nearly half a billion pounds to get them there. Fair play to them.

No problem with it being closer to £400m than £500m, the general point stands as previously mentioned.
We know where the money's gone - the point is a significant chunk has been wasted.
Regards Brighton, the point is how they've scouted players and the value they've realised for those players.
They've spent similar amounts in transfer fees on relative unknowns as we have this season. Think we all know none of ours will be realising the sell-on value Brighton's have in the last few years.

 

[Silent Blade]

No problem with it being closer to £400m than £500m, the general point stands as previously mentioned.
We know where the money's gone - the point is a significant chunk has been wasted.
Regards Brighton, the point is how they've scouted players and the value they've realised for those players.
They've spent similar amounts in transfer fees on relative unknowns as we have this season. Think we all know none of ours will be realising the sell-on value Brighton's have in the last few years.

Brighton have £500M debts

 

[Sean Thornton]

No problem with it being closer to £400m than £500m, the general point stands as previously mentioned.
We know where the money's gone - the point is a significant chunk has been wasted.
Regards Brighton, the point is how they've scouted players and the value they've realised for those players.
They've spent similar amounts in transfer fees on relative unknowns as we have this season. Think we all know none of ours will be realising the sell-on value Brighton's have in the last few years.

“They've spent similar amounts in transfer fees on relative unknowns as we have this season”

They also spent £97m on four players and received £195m on player sales.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Brighton have £500M debts

“The point still stands”

 

[Pedro Verde]

But Pedro knows how a football club should be run.

You must excuse my winger hes not good with numbers

 

[Greg.]

Still think it's worth looking at Norwich's accounts as a club that has yo-yo'd between the two leagues and tries to run on a more sustainable self-funding basis.

The metric I look at is a proxy for free cash flow - this basically takes revenue, deducts cash costs (wages, stadium running costs and so on), deducts transfer spending (the cash figures, not the football accounting version where you spread the transfer fee over the contract length). However this has still been negative in 4 of the last 5 years published for them with no major transfer spending at all really, something they have been criticised for like we are now when they were last in the PL.



It's just the sad reality of football I find - every team loses money in the Championship and so have to either financially gamble to get promoted or sell talent. In the PL the step-up in revenue in significant and so you can make money (even though your wages also mechanically go up a bit), but if you don't go big in the transfer market you are probably relegated straight away, however if you do spend heavily and still go down you are potentially in big trouble the year after.

The solution is basically have rich owners unfortunately. Not a surprise that the former Championship teams who seem to have established themselves as decent PL teams like Villa and Fulham have had massive owner funding to achieve this.

 

[Rodley]

Of course not. That's my point; and that's why no-one is biting.


If they are the picture gets worse. We lost a lot of money in the two years in the Championship.




Nope, the £400m is gross turnover taken from the published accounts. TV revenue accounts for about £220m; the equal share another £100m. I've made my 23/24 estimates in that last 15 minutes so haven't researched the TV deals; I've just taken the figures from our last PL stints.

View attachment 173813

Here's lots of numbers explaining that. Over 5 years I would guess we'll breakeven which is about the best we can expect without an owner willing or capable of underwriting us by £50m+ per season as most other PL teams have. The profit this year is almost entirely driven by selling Berge and Ndiaye for far in excess of their carrying values (£11m profit for Berge; £20m for Ndiaye).


Brighton owed Tony Bloom over £400m at the last published accounts. They can do what they've done because they have the backer to let them play the long game. It's paying off for them now but it's needed nearly half a billion pounds to get them there. Fair play to them.

We need new ownership PDQ. If PA can’t afford to subsidise us, we’re absolutely fucked.

 

[Proper Blade]

We've recruited incredibly poorly in each of our last 3 seasons in the Prem.

First year back, Mousset made an impact for a few months, otherwise it was just the Championship team playing every week.

Next season Wilder wanted to sign Matty Cash and Antonee Robinson. He got Jayden Bogle and Max Lowe.

This season we miraculously managed to start the season with a weaker squad than the one we had in the Championship. Which wasn't even that good to begin with.

We're not only ambitionless, we're also thoughtless with our recruitment. We haven't signed a single player across those 3 seasons that you can really say has made a big impact over a sustained period of time.

We didn't even try to stay up this year and you knew the game was up the second we sold Ndiaye. As the article says, the Prince was and always has been more interested in turning a profit for himself than advancing as a club.

 

[Pedro's Winger]

The point about Brighton's scouting and realising value for players has nothing to do with the amount they owe their owner.
Very smart scouting has enabled a club to acquire players for the kind of amounts we have paid for players this season (less in several cases) and those players have been (and will be) sold for many tens of millions.
If you don't have a sugar daddy then you need to be smart. Brighton happen to have a sugar daddy and have still been smart.
Don't know if Brentford's owners are minted but they've also been smart regardless.
Pretty sure both clubs are widely recognised as being well-run in football terms including their acquisition and sale of players.
If it can be done, surely it's something to aspire to rather than just accepting United can't compete.

 

[Tom Bott]

I hate that we sold Ndiaye and I don't believe it was essential to survive as a club. I fully understand the argument against that view

The term 'sold' implies that we put a for sale sign around Ndiaye and Berge, the reality with Illi at least is that his boyhood club came calling with European cup matches to play, better weather and probably better wages.
Who would sign for Sheffield United in a probable struggle/relegation battle, given that other option.

Much of the sentiment around these two players assumes they would allow us to fare better than we are doing.
Though neither player set the stage alight V Man City in the semi final and Berge was non too prolific when we were last in the PL.

 

[Tom Bott]

Next season Wilder wanted to sign Matty Cash and Antonee Robinson. He got Jayden Bogle and Max Lowe.

Matty Cash signed a 5 year / £16,900,000 contract with the Aston Villa F.C

£17 million plus in wages, might have been the clincher, on top of the £ 16 million transfer fee.

What wages would we have offered him, I wonder.