Skip to main content

Owners have pumped money into Forest

Nottingham Forest’s pre-tax loss tripled from £15.5m to £46.2m, despite revenue rising £11.3m (61%) from £18.4m to a club record £29.7m, as operating expenses increased by £25m (46%) from £54m to £79m.  In addition, profit from player sales fell £10.2m from £14.3m to just £4.1m.  Forest’s £46.2m pre-tax loss was one of the largest reported in Championship, only surpassed by the other promoted clubs Fulham £57.0m and Bournemouth £55.5m.

Forest are no strangers to losses, as they have only reported a profit once since 2005 – and that was entirely due to a £40m loan write-off in 2017. Otherwise, the club has consistently lost money, amounting to £141m in the last 10 seasons, including £108m in the five years since Marinakis arrived.

Forest’s staff costs increased with the wage bill up £21.4m (57%) from £37.2m to £58.6m. This was very largely the price of success, as it included £20.9m bonus payments for promotion.

Since the arrival of Marinakis, Forest’s revenue has grown by £8.9m (43%) from £20.8m to £29.7m, with increases in all three revenue streams: broadcasting £4.0m, commercial £3.1m and match day £2.2m.

Of course, Forest’s revenue will be significantly higher this season in the Premier League. This is dependent on final finishing position in the league, though revenue for clubs promoted in the last six seasons was on average £134m, which would represent a £104m increase for Forest.

Forest’s transfer spend since promotion has been considerable, as they have spent an estimated .  This was sixth highest gross spend in the Premier League, according to Transfermarkt, ahead of the likes of Manchester City, Liverpool and Tottenham. It was also more than the two other promoted clubs combined.

Forest’s £21m debt was one of the lowest in the Championship, a long way below the likes of Bournemouth £184m, Blackburn Rovers £163m and Middlesbrough £148m.   However, Forest’s debt would have been much higher without Marinakis converting £93m debt to equity in the last five years, which makes £159m capitalised by various owners since 2013.

In the last 10 years various owners have pumped £168m into Forest, boosted by £31m from (net) player sales. The vast majority of this money has been used to simply cover operating losses with only £11m spent on improving infrastructure.

Clearly, Forest’s primary objective this season is to avoid relegation, hence the massive transfer spending last summer. Of course, this does not guarantee that they will stay up, but it does at least give them a fighting chance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wolves get raw deal from FFP

  I used to see a lifelong Wolves fan for lunch once a month.   He was approaching ninety, but still went to games.   Sadly he passed away the other week. As football finance guru Kieran Maguire has noted, Wolves continue to be constrained by financial fair play rules.  Radio 4 this morning described them as this year's 'crisis club' and the pessimists have certainly been piling in. Martin Samuel wrote sympathetically in the Sunday Times yesterday, saying that the Premier League drives talent away with regulatory red tape: 'Why could Al-Hilal sign Neves? Because Wolves needed the money. And why did Wolves need the money? Because the club had to comply with an artificial construct known as financial fair play. So Wolves are going skint, yes? No. There is no suggestion that Wolves are in financial trouble, only that they are failing to meet the rigours of FFP. Wolves’ owners appear to have the money to run the club, and invest in the club, and in fact came up with a pow

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day income is

Charlton takeover approved

The long awaited takeover of Charlton Athletic by SE7 Partners from Thomas Sandgaard has been approved:  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/se7-partners-obtain-efl-approval-for-charlton-athletic-takeover/ Charlton have had unhappy experiences with owners for over a decade, so how this works out will remain to be seen.  There is certainly potential there, but will it be realised? This interview with Charlie Methven gives detail not available elsewhere:  https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-on-the-record/