Football betting site Betway

Group Company Accounts 2017-2018 now published

The group company accounts are now available on the companies house website - this is for the parent company Swansea City Football 2002 Limited.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04305508/filing-history

Comments

  • Great analysis.

    Note the question posted to Swiss Rambler - have the owners been taking money out of the club? - and SR’s response - no.
  • Those of you who use twitter will no doubt be aware of the financial analysis of football clubs by 'Swiss Ramble'.

    Today he has shared his analysis of the Swans latest set of financial results and it's worth a read (by reading through the thread on his twitter account).



  • One guy says

    We have had a few years now of fans saying the new owners have made millions off the back of club income and are funding DC United signings off said income. Ridiculous?

    And the Swiss Ramble guy answers
    1. Yeah, that’s not the case. They haven’t put their hands in their pockets (since buying their stake), but I don’t think they’ve filled them either.
  • Cadleigh said:
    Great analysis.

    Note the question posted to Swiss Rambler - have the owners been taking money out of the club? - and SR’s response - no.
    The exact quote... They haven’t put their hands in their pockets (since buying their stake), but I don’t think they’ve filled them either.
  • Thanks @Mark_Jack_London for the Swiss Ramble analysis. Fascinating stuff that I haven't really had time to absorb.

    However, he seems to have analysed the accounts of the main subsidiary (the first ones published) rather than the accounts of the group company which were published later - I feel an analysis of the group accounts is more appropriate because of the impact of the acquisition of STADCO which does not appear in the former accounts. We "bought" STADCO for £zero and it is now a 100% owned subsidiary of the group company.

    Swiss Rambler comments about staff numbers increasing by 40 to 409 and this being partly due to taking on stadium management. However, if we look at the group company accounts, we now see the employee numbers for "Stadium" to be an additional 149, making a grand total of 558, not 409. So his statement that the increase is due to taking on stadium management appears not be correct because of what is shown in the group accounts. Also, football staff numbers increased by 23 in that year - can't see how we can justify that. 

    This additional number of 149 from STADCO is a bit puzzling though. Obviously some full time people in that number but surely never 149 - but probably also made up some part time workers including matchday staff? Maybe calculated as FTE's (Full Time Equivalents) ? The staff numbers are also an average number employed during the year and we only took over STADCO in March 2018 so maybe the 149 number is also complicated by averaging.


    The acquisition of STADCO actually helped a bit because we "inherited" £800k cash and their profit reduced the group losses. Ongoing though, we will now have all the costs associated with the stadium rather than just 33%. We will also get all the income of course , some presumably from the Ospreys but also any from summer concerts. We will also have to pay the £1.1M estimated for the rectification of the stadium defects, more than that if they don't do it PDQ.


  • Acquiring STADCO will be a liability, short term but may pay off long term
  • Getting the stadium now is going to cost us massively . It is now 14 years old and the costs to keep, repair and renew will now get bigger and bigger . I have heard that it will lose close to a million a year over above the income it generates and that is before the cost of any major repairs like a new pitch . A massive mistake to take it on .
  • Getting the stadium now is going to cost us massively . It is now 14 years old and the costs to keep, repair and renew will now get bigger and bigger . I have heard that it will lose close to a million a year over above the income it generates and that is before the cost of any major repairs like a new pitch . A massive mistake to take it on .
    The owners are in it for the long term, and are doing things now that are right, there is little to gain short term but will be good for Swansea City long term. They will stabilise the team and then push us on with an excellent management team and good infrastructure behind the scenes. Hard medicine yes but that means we will get better. Time to stop beating the crap out of them at every decision that doesn't suit the agenda.

    The was a fella on twitter that simple said, if Routledge isn't signed then that's me done with Swansea City, I remember the same fella berating Routledge just before Christmas saying he wasn't worthy to wear the shirt.

    Pablo
  • Jacktar said:
    One guy says

    We have had a few years now of fans saying the new owners have made millions off the back of club income and are funding DC United signings off said income. Ridiculous?

    And the Swiss Ramble guy answers
    1. Yeah, that’s not the case. They haven’t put their hands in their pockets (since buying their stake), but I don’t think they’ve filled them either.
    The Swiss Ramblers answer has no definite conclusions.
    The statement they haven't put their hands in their pockets is fact, that is followed by he thinks they haven't filled their pockets, in other words if he thinks he doesn't know. With the accounts only showing income with breakdowns, the outgoings do not. saying that it is very difficult to establish true income in transfers or indeed paid out, as the figures in the press and instalment plans etc cloud the issue. I would settle for a breakdown on wages and fees because 300 of the employee's last year were on peanuts some were even on minimum wage 1 day a fortnight.
    The current first team squad of 25 does not come to more than 15M, the income in the championship is more than that. The parachute payments also cover any downside from the relegation. Look at the massive increase in employees since these guys arrived in 2016, 90% are very low earners but they make the totals look good.
    Their outlay is no where near 68M as they have recouped from 28 further investors, who also contribute FA and also none of it goes into the club.
    They haven't bought shares off Jenkins and crew for FA.
    Not one person on this site disputes any of the income shown, not one person can give a definite answer to where it all goes. So those who think they haven't taken anything, Don't know and those like me who think they have also don't know.  Only time will tell, cashing in on all the young talent, making more low paid workers redundant, keeping the high paid management structure in place should give us a clue
  • Phillip, your opinion is well known and your detailed breakdowns of finances and your suspicions of embezzlement. There's no need to repeat something that can't be verified. As you say yourself no one knows. All you have are suspicions and that suspicion has been slavishly followed by the majority on this site, yet there is no evidence to support it. None.
    I think it's maybe time to let it be, until such time as proof emerges...but this climate of suspicion is a damaging thing. The slanderous name calling, the anti-American bias.....are all damaging to the club. I always felt this was a kneejerk response to relegation.  
  • edited May 8
    Phillip said:
    Jacktar said:
    One guy says

    We have had a few years now of fans saying the new owners have made millions off the back of club income and are funding DC United signings off said income. Ridiculous?

    And the Swiss Ramble guy answers
    1. Yeah, that’s not the case. They haven’t put their hands in their pockets (since buying their stake), but I don’t think they’ve filled them either.
    The Swiss Ramblers answer has no definite conclusions.
    The statement they haven't put their hands in their pockets is fact, that is followed by he thinks they haven't filled their pockets, in other words if he thinks he doesn't know. With the accounts only showing income with breakdowns, the outgoings do not. saying that it is very difficult to establish true income in transfers or indeed paid out, as the figures in the press and instalment plans etc cloud the issue. I would settle for a breakdown on wages and fees because 300 of the employee's last year were on peanuts some were even on minimum wage 1 day a fortnight.
    The current first team squad of 25 does not come to more than 15M, the income in the championship is more than that. The parachute payments also cover any downside from the relegation. Look at the massive increase in employees since these guys arrived in 2016, 90% are very low earners but they make the totals look good.
    Their outlay is no where near 68M as they have recouped from 28 further investors, who also contribute FA and also none of it goes into the club.
    They haven't bought shares off Jenkins and crew for FA.
    Not one person on this site disputes any of the income shown, not one person can give a definite answer to where it all goes. So those who think they haven't taken anything, Don't know and those like me who think they have also don't know.  Only time will tell, cashing in on all the young talent, making more low paid workers redundant, keeping the high paid management structure in place should give us a clue
    You are looking for one person, I dispute most of what you say, so does Colin
    You ask where's the money gone and like a broken record, I tell you, on expensive misfits that were not right for our club, no one disputes that mistakes were made but the embezzlement you constantly talk of just cannot happen. You're amateur accounting is not good for the club, have a word with someone who knows what they are talking about.
  • Well there you are then, these guys are good for the club.
    They spend 1.4M of the clubs funds to buy freehold land, for the purpose of extension on a lease hold building, this was when we knew we were down (although negotiated earlier when we had a slim chance of survival) What a piece of business brilliance.
    They have pocketed all further investors money, they told us 12 months ago we had to cut wages, they did players and others yet spent 1.4M, how many jobs could that have saved. that land has nothing to do with football unless there is money in right of way, or building something, it was the last thing we needed, if it has profit in it the clubs football will not see it.
    They don't look after their staff, they spend no time watching our sport and know even less about it.
    What on this Gods earth can they do for Swansea City as a football club, they only sell and borrow.
    Those that cant explain where the money goes, put it down as incompetency, well OK, in football terms they are the most incompetent of all the clubs in 3 years. (Therefore they are incompetent but learning, we were told they were experts, just another lie.
    Just look at the clubs who had dodgy so called investors, Birmingham, Bolton, Sunderland, A Villa, Leeds ,these are big clubs who are struggling financially only AV have now got a backer with vast wealth who is a football nut and will emerge better off.
    Unless the owners are true football people, we will never ever succeed.
  • I'm going to try and have one more go, after that I give up because like Ponty, you won't listen to reason or logic.

    Well there you are then, these guys are good for the club.
    They are trying to be good for our club which in turn will be good for them, the only way they can make money is by selling the club for more than they purchased it, that can only happen in the PL

    They spend 1.4M of the clubs funds to buy freehold land, for the purpose of extension on a lease hold building, this was when we knew we were down (although negotiated earlier when we had a slim chance of survival) What a piece of business brilliance.
    This piece of business was negotiated in 2103, long before any new owners were lined up, it was key to Swansea City becoming a bigger club, (Southampton, Leicester, and dare I say it Cardiff, all with 30,000 plus stadiums), the council had this land earmarked for a McDonalds drive through back in 2003 when plans first emerged. Securing this land is vital to long term plans but if you want to only think short term then you have a point.

    They have pocketed all further investors money, they told us 12 months ago we had to cut wages, they did players and others yet spent 1.4M, how many jobs could that have saved. that land has nothing to do with football unless there is money in right of way, or building something, it was the last thing we needed, if it has profit in it the clubs football will not see it.
    The land was finally purchased in 2016, showing up on the 2017 balance sheet, the process had long been started, I still think its right for the club, long term.

    They don't look after their staff, they spend no time watching our sport and know even less about it.
    I feel for everyone that loses their job but so far, its been voluntary redundancies, football is a precarious business, many have been employed since we got to the PL, the bottom line is if you lose half you're income stream with further income loses to follow then jobs are not going to be secure, just like Tata Steel (and I feel for those too). I agree that they spend no time watching our sport but that could be to do with the welcome they get, I totally agree they know nothing about football but I don't suppose John Henry knows much either at Liverpool.

    What on this Gods earth can they do for Swansea City as a football club, they only sell and borrow.
    Stabilise us, make us stronger, short term pain, long term gain.

    Those that cant explain where the money goes, put it down as incompetency, well OK, in football terms they are the most incompetent of all the clubs in 3 years. (Therefore they are incompetent but learning, we were told they were experts, just another lie.
    Borja, Andre Ayew, Wilfiried Bony, Sam Clucas, best part of £65m, squandered. As we've established, they know nothing on football so can't be blamed for making monies available, it probably made business sense insomuch as if those four had done the business on the pitch, we may well have still been in the PL.

    Just look at the clubs who had dodgy so called investors, Birmingham, Bolton, Sunderland, A Villa, Leeds ,these are big clubs who are struggling financially only AV have now got a backer with vast wealth who is a football nut and will emerge better off.
    Do you know that money is carefully scrutinised by the leagues, no matter how wealthy the Villa guy is, he'll have trouble lumping millions in, same with Coates at Stoke, FFP, whilst I know there are loopholes makes sure of that. West Bromwich have borrowed all their forthcoming parachute monies, I fear for them if they don't make it through the play offs.

    Unless the owners are true football people, we will never ever succeed.
    Disagree, running a football club is never easy, Liverpool needed a loan of £150m to build a new stand, John Henry secured that, he knows nothing about football but does know business, before the Americans came in, we were borrowing off Barclays at extortionate rates of interest, totally unsustainable
    Listen, like you, I'd prefer a local, died in the wool Jack billionaire to own us but as they are in short supply we have to live with the owners we got.
    PabloChris_Sharman
Sign In or Register to comment.