' CARDIFF CITY LOSE £8.7MILL AS WAGE BILL SLASHED '

' CARDIFF CITY LOSE £8.7MILL AS WAGE BILL SLASHED '

AS NEW ACCOUNTS REVEALED TODAY.

Cardiff City's accounts reveal £8.7m loss as wage bill slashed to counter plummeting revenues


By Chris Wathan

Tuesday 7th March 2017


Cardiff City made a loss of £8.74m last season as revenues at the club fell by more than £7m as life outside the Premier League continues to bite.


There is a note that the club was advanced £7.3m from Tormen Finance Inc. – a company which has a common director with the club – at an interest rate of 8% on top of an existing £8.8m taking the figure to £13.5m.

And, according to new accounts released today, the Bluebirds remain in debt to the tune of more than £100m, with the vast majority owed to owner Vincent Tan.

However, the new figures from the club's overall company – Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Limited, which relate to the 2015/16 season up to June last year, do state that Tan has continued with his plan to make the club debt-free with £10m of his loan written off and, following the accounts' reporting period, a further £8m converted to equity.

Despite Tan providing further loans in this financial year, the stated debt to Tan still actually fell by around £1m and is down from £123m in May 2014 with pledges to continue his financial support.


" Still, the cost-cutting referred to in recent months is evident. "

Wages are down by 17.5% from £30.84m to £25.41m, the same percentage drop as the club's revenue that went from £40.292m to £33.199m.
Of that revenue, 75% came from centralised broadcasting and commercial distributions – including Premier League parachute payments.

Player wages took up 76% of the club's income – a similar ratio to last season.

The figures come 12 months after the Bluebirds posted the first profit of the Vincent Tan era where the first season in the Championship following relegation from the Premier League saw a £3.8m profit reported.

However, that figure was boosted by a debt restructuring from Tan of around £13m as well as player sales profit of £9.7m from the departures of the likes of Gary Medel and Steven Caulker. Those player sales profits are down to £2.498m in the latest accounts, which fell before the exit of goalkeeper David Marshall to Hull at the start of the current season.


Furthermore, a strategic report within the accounts, signed by chief executive Ken Choo, states that the club was “reporting a reduced operating loss” of £18.136m down £9.604m from 2016's £27.74m.

Choo added that the on-going reduction of Premier League parachute payments – which fell by £5m and are cited as the main, direct factor for the reduction in overall revenue – “has been more than compensated by reductions in player salaries and costs.”

Other revenue streams are also down including gate receipts on the back of falling attendances, down around £1.5m to £4.18m from £5.67m. Advertising and commercial also fell around £2m from £6.07m to £4.09m.

The accounts report £2.2m of “exceptional costs” that relate to “change of football players and senior management, including employment termination costs” although, unlike in previous years, it is not clear if this refers directly to Russell Slade's departure as he was not sacked before the end of his contract. Paul Trollope's dismissal in October 2016 is not covered by these accounts.

In terms of the debt, the accounts cite “exceptional income” of £10m that “relates to the discharge of an amount due to the owner” which had been £13m the previous year.

It also cites the aforementioned conversion of £8m in loan to equity in November 2016.



There is a note that the club was advanced £7.3m from Tormen Finance Inc. – a company which has a common director with the club – at an interest rate of 8% on top of an existing £8.8m taking the figure to £13.5m.



The accounts confirm the end of the Langston dispute, stating that no money is owed save a payment of £1.75m should the club be promoted to the Premier League.

In terms of Tan's loan, the full amount of it is again referred to as a non-current liability while the vast majority is cited as non-interest bearing.

The accounts state that further money was loaned by Tan during the season, coming with conversion agreements while notes in the accounts add that he will continue to support the group “in the foreseeable future and provide additional finance in order that it can settle its liabilities.”

In his chairman's notes, Mehmet Dalman states that the club is “looking forward....with optimism, determination and desire to return the club back where it belongs, the Premiership (sic)” and that the board will “do all in its power to support” manager Neil Warnock, before adding his thanks to the club's fans.

In the final outlook of Choos' notes, it states: “Our aim remains to attain promotion back to the Premiership (sic) at the earliest possible time.”




Ken Choo, Vincent Tan and Mehmet Dalman...the Cardiff hierarchy

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

" Still, the cost-cutting referred to in recent months is evident. "

Wages are down by 17.5% from £30.84m to £25.41m, the same percentage drop as the club's revenue that went from £40.292m to £33.199m.
Of that revenue, 75% came from centralised broadcasting and commercial distributions – including Premier League parachute payments.

Player wages took up 76% of the club's income – a similar ratio to last season.

Other revenue streams are also down including gate receipts on the back of falling attendances, down around £1.5m to £4.18m from £5.67m. Advertising and commercial also fell around £2m from £6.07m to £4.09m.

However, the new figures from the club's overall company – Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Limited, which relate to the 2015/16 season up to June last year, do state that Tan has continued with his plan to make the club debt-free with £10m of his loan written off and, following the accounts' reporting period, a further £8m converted to equity.

Despite Tan providing further loans in this financial year, the stated debt to Tan still actually fell by around £1m and is down from £123m in May 2014 with pledges to continue his financial support.

There is a note that the club was advanced £7.3m from Tormen Finance Inc. – a company which has a common director with the club – at an interest rate of 8% on top of an existing £8.8m taking the figure to £13.5m.

The accounts report £2.2m of “exceptional costs” that relate to “change of football players and senior management, including employment termination costs” although, unlike in previous years.

It is not clear if this refers directly to Russell Slade's departure as he was not sacked before the end of his contract. Paul Trollope's dismissal in October 2016 is not covered by these accounts.

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Thank you Keith much appreciated


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Thank you Keith much appreciated


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Overall summary by Keith Morgan

1) CCFCH made a loss in the year to 31 May 2016 but the level of losses meant that the club was compliant with Financial Fair Play Regulations.

2) A loan write off of £10m by the owner , and a cash injection from him of £7m, plus a further cash injection by Tormen Finance of £7.3m and financial assistance by WMG Funds greatly helped the club`s financial position in the year.

3) A major cost cutting exercise was necessary during the year to try and balance out the club`s drop in income compared to the previous season , and this is likely to have to be repeated in the current season , plus further into the future., particularly when “parachute payment” receipts end in June 2018.

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

So this ffp is all bollocks by the club?

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

So this ffp is all bollocks by the club?

Pretty sure it's not and we are still not in a great position FPP wise....but I'm no expert perhaps someone with a greater understanding of the rules could elaborate

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

So this ffp is all bollocks by the club?

Im not saying its bollocks
but it just seems strange looking at the accounts shown above

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

The rules changed starting from the current season. Financial Fair Play is now badged as Profitability and Sustainability.Chris Wathan did a good article on this recently for Walesonline.

The average over three year period loss is £5m a season. If over that figure , it can go up to an average of £13m a season if the £8m balance is made up by NEW money introduced by the owners (i.e. new real cash , not a debt to equity conversion or a loan write off). If the loss is over £5m , the club has to provide evidence of this new cash injection and also has to provide a two year profit projection to show the loss levels will not be repeated in the future.

The £3.8m profit in 2014/15 was adjusted into a £10m loss by the League not allowing a £13m accounting adjustment to do with long term loans in the period (an adjustment which had to be made to comply with accounting rules).

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

The rules changed starting from the current season. Financial Fair Play is now badged as Profitability and Sustainability.Chris Wathan did a good article on this recently for Walesonline.


The average over three year period loss is £5m a season. If over that figure , it can go up to an average of £13m a season if the £8m balance is made up by NEW money introduced by the owners (i.e. new real cash , not a debt to equity conversion or a loan write off). If the loss is over £5m , the club has to provide evidence of this new cash injection and also has to provide a two year profit projection to show the loss levels will not be repeated in the future.

The £3.8m profit in 2014/15 was adjusted into a £10m loss by the League not allowing a £13m accounting adjustment to do with long term loans in the period (an adjustment which had to be made to comply with accounting rules).

thanks for that
but if it the new rules started this season the average loss of 5 million a season over 3 seasons cant be established for another 2 seasons surely

Or are they back dating the new rules

Keith, Where can or will the extra money come from to support Warnock like they have promised?

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

The rules changed starting from the current season. Financial Fair Play is now badged as Profitability and Sustainability.Chris Wathan did a good article on this recently for Walesonline.


The average over three year period loss is £5m a season. If over that figure , it can go up to an average of £13m a season if the £8m balance is made up by NEW money introduced by the owners (i.e. new real cash , not a debt to equity conversion or a loan write off). If the loss is over £5m , the club has to provide evidence of this new cash injection and also has to provide a two year profit projection to show the loss levels will not be repeated in the future.

The £3.8m profit in 2014/15 was adjusted into a £10m loss by the League not allowing a £13m accounting adjustment to do with long term loans in the period (an adjustment which had to be made to comply with accounting rules).

thanks for that
but if it the new rules started this season the average loss of 5 million a season over 3 seasons cant be established for another 2 seasons surely

They start off looking at this season and the previous two seasons. Next year they will have had two seasons under the new rules and only have to include one "old rule" season , then the new 3 year rule will be fully in force after that

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

My commentary on the accounts is on the Trust website if you want to cut and paste it onto here


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=182801

Well im confused
I thought ffp is over 3 year periods and you must not go over 39 million losses in that 3 year period
we made 3.8 million 2 seasons ago lost 8.7 million last season , that is a 4.9 million loss over 2 seasons how the hell are we anywhere near in breach of ffp
also go back 3 and 4 seasons ago we must of lost over those 2 seasons well over 40 million for us to have been under that transfer embargo
or am I wrong and being the forum fool once again as some call me

The rules changed starting from the current season. Financial Fair Play is now badged as Profitability and Sustainability.Chris Wathan did a good article on this recently for Walesonline.


The average over three year period loss is £5m a season. If over that figure , it can go up to an average of £13m a season if the £8m balance is made up by NEW money introduced by the owners (i.e. new real cash , not a debt to equity conversion or a loan write off). If the loss is over £5m , the club has to provide evidence of this new cash injection and also has to provide a two year profit projection to show the loss levels will not be repeated in the future.

The £3.8m profit in 2014/15 was adjusted into a £10m loss by the League not allowing a £13m accounting adjustment to do with long term loans in the period (an adjustment which had to be made to comply with accounting rules).

thanks for that
but if it the new rules started this season the average loss of 5 million a season over 3 seasons cant be established for another 2 seasons surely

They start off looking at this season and the previous two seasons. Next year they will have had two seasons under the new rules and only have to include one "old rule" season , then the new 3 year rule will be fully in force after that

Keith, Where can or will the extra money come from to support Warnock like they have promised?

Very good question...can't see it coming from anywhere apart from Tans Wallet ???

Just goes to prove, now days if you want to compete with the big boys you have to be playing with the elite 20 in the premier league, that's where all the cash and glamour is im afraid

Keith, Where can or will the extra money come from to support Warnock like they have promised?

Very good question...can't see it coming from anywhere apart from Tans Wallet ???

If , say, Neil Warnock spends £6m on three new players he wants and they are given three year contracts , then the cost each season for those players will be their total wages plus one-third of that transfer cost. If it is assumed they are on £15k a week each (anyone`s guess of course) , then that annual cost will be (£15k x 3 x 52) plus £2m. That comes to £3.34m.
This will have to be found by wage cuts elsewhere and the possible transfer out of a player or two. Far from impossible , but ongoing hard work to achieve it.

Keith, Where can or will the extra money come from to support Warnock like they have promised?

Very good question...can't see it coming from anywhere apart from Tans Wallet ???

If , say, Neil Warnock spends £6m on three new players he wants and they are given three year contracts , then the cost each season for those players will be their total wages plus one-third of that transfer cost. If it is assumed they are on £15k a week each (anyone`s guess of course) , then that annual cost will be (£15k x 3 x 52) plus £2m. That comes to £3.34m.
This will have to be found by wage cuts elsewhere and the possible transfer out of a player or two. Far from impossible , but ongoing hard work to achieve it.

Definitely hard work but hopefully wages less than 15k and hopefully get players on a free transfer so cutting costs that way?

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

When tan took over we were around 68 million in debt

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

When tan took over we were around 68 million in debt

And in high court!!

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

When tan took over we were around 68 million in debt

And in high court!!

Look at it ,we are definitely the last 2 season managing the club better, our wage bill is still too high if tan writes off another 60 million as promised ww will be in a much better position, i think promotion is a must next year

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

Cheers Keith

To be realistic at this current moment Tan is getting himself out the mess caused during his own reign during the last 7 years.

Three questions.

Keith, Vincent Tan is currently keeping our club afloat I agree, but is it not years of bad management at the top that has caused our financial mess in the first place and that is why we are in this mess, yes or no?

I thinks its being stated that we are still currently £100mill in debt(I thought it was now actually lower?) and at one stage we reached nearly £200mill debt to Vincent Tan, so what was the actual debt of our club the day Vincent Tan bought in to our club?

And are you able to remember the actual debt our club had when Peter Ridsdale took over?

Cheers Keith

1) I agree that it is bad management over several years and several owners that has got the club into a financial mess

2) the debt owed to Vincent Tan as at 31 May 2016 was £101m and that owed to Tormen was £13.5m. I don`t think the debt ever reached anything like £200m due to Vincent Tan , although that might have been the total gross amount he has put into the club before writing part of it off and converting other parts into shares.
I can`t honestly remember the debt levels from years ago without digging out old sets of accounts (which I don`t have time to do today) , but they were far less than the current ones because the club has made substantial losses in recent years.
Part of the increase in debts is , of course , balanced out by the increase in assets such as the stadium since the Sam Hammam era.

Cheers Keith

To be realistic at this current moment Tan is getting himself out the mess caused during his own reign during the last 7 years.

I can`t disagree with that. The financial mess shouldn`t have been created in the first place. However, if the current work on cost reduction continues and the debt to equity conversion is finalised, then the club will be in a far stronger position than when he took over.

I have also managed to find those debt level figures. These are the net deficit figures (total liabilities less total assets) for the last 7 years , each ending on 31 May

2010 - £4.5m
2011 - £15.9m
2012 - £28.1m
2013 - £56.3m
2014 - £65.8m
2015 - £58.9m
2016 - £67.7m

So net debt has gone up by £63.2m over the period. However , a full debt to equity conversion of the £101m owed to VT as at 31 May 2016 would mean that the net deficit of £4.5m would have been converted into a net surplus of £32m , an improvement of nearly £37m .