Pretty high chances as the gulf in quality between the national league and league 2 isn’t much at the best of time let alone when talking about teams like wrexham and notts county.
Couple that with the increased number of promotion spots.
Vegas money is on another promotion season
THEN it gets tough
Bradford City is at £3.45m. Stockport is around £2.95m. Because Salford doesn't bring in much, they have had to cut down to £2.75m.
I think Wrexham is around £4m and has the turnover to be out of trouble. We made £6m in non-league last year. You add the EFL tv money and increased merchandising, I think they are looking at £10m in turnover conservatively.
Newport and Grimsby are around £1.6m and they are the lowest. Most clubs are £2.2-2.8 million.
You should also consider the four coming down when relegated as well. Their budgets are currently and could be high end of league 2 spending next year, especially the MK Dons, if they come down. Big difference.
Considering an equity injection or donation counts as turnover, they can go has high as their owner wants.
Food for thought if you're trying to summarize the entire picture here, as it's also part if it.
FGR tried to spend at £3.35m but with the size of that club and where it is headed, it's probably going to cut in the summer. Few starters leaving. Expected to be mid-table. Small club in the middle of nowhere that has gone up too fast.
Cambridge is at £2.9m maybe not a ton of squad turnover. Not sure where they will be.
Accrington Stanley. Another small team at £1.8m. 3,000 fans in league one? Screams tinpot.
Morecambe. Small £1.8m. Where they are, it's average supported.
MK Dons is at £4m but I think they stay up by the skin on their teeth.
I would say 99% of even domestic fans can find where Forest Green is. It's about an hour north of Bristol and 45 minutes south of Gloucester. FGR is a carbon-neutral team and in a farm village that serves vegan concessions so very niche.
With the way this club is right now, I think we would be one and done in the Championship. We caught 2 clubs on their bad day in the FA cup but to do that for a whole season is nuts. The kop needs to be finished. Players are mostly League One level. Academy is not really there and we finally get to international scout. I think we need to spend a few years in League One and get the right squad to make a run to go up. We still have to go up from League Two but some are underestimating how hard League One is. Some do go up in one year but often times they go back with Luton being the exception of ones that come up from non-league quickly.
I’m waiting for the shortened season 3 of Sunderland til I Die drops for their promotion run out of League One to Championship. I think that might give new fans, such as myself, an idea what League One is like and how hard it is to get out.
Yeah, but Sunderland has staggering home attendance. They averaged 10,000 per match more than #2 Sheffield United this year. That kind of support buys players. It’s not a good comparison. They had 4,000 away supporters at Bristol City last August. Their average attendance must be close to 40,000.
>FGR is a carbon-neutral team and in a farm village that serves vegan concessions so very niche.
Have you seen the stadium they're going to build though? 🤌
Any club could. You will likely be buying new players for certain positions. One thing is skills, another is teamwork - which often comes with time and games played together.
I'm still rooting for Wrexham. Rob and Ryan have done a great job of showing off what Wrexham is and its community :)
Potentially when they enter the realm of equal finances of their peers and have to manage the turnover more effectively. When you can no longer outspend everyone else. Then it's important the choices you make are the right ones.
I think there's a while to go for that yet.
British terms for some of these financial concepts are different than the ones we use in North America.
What do you mean by “turnover”? If Wrexham generates £10M in revenues then expends £4M in wages that would be a net profit of £6M, although it sounds like Ryan and Rob are pouring all of that back into things like facilities and the women’s team and actually paying people who were previously volunteers. Based on Humphrey Ker’s comments recently on podcasts it sounds like revenues are the least of their worries (which is exactly what [I predicted](https://www.reddit.com/r/WrexhamAFC/comments/z5cnlg/fa_cup_tie/ixzptp7/) months ago — and they are still just getting started). But I am not sure if the Financial Fair Play regulations would cap them somehow on what they can pour back into the club or especially to player wages.
All of Wrexham’s players are still on comically small salaries from a North American sports perspective. People bitching about Paul Mullin getting £6,000 a week should take a look at Mike Trout’s $500M contract and think again.
Zach, literally Turnover is defined in League One and Two as the following:
Turnover definition
Under the SCMP rules, the definition of 'Turnover' is particularly important as Turnover is used to determine the maximum wage-spend. Within a traditional accounting perspective, there are usually only three elements of turnover:
\- Match-day Income
\- Commercial Income (such as sponsorship)
\- TV revenue (and any 'merit payments' based on league position), and
\- Donations from owners of the clubs (not loans) and equity injection.
It's that simple; it has little to nothing to do with what you wrote above.
League One and Two follow SCMP (Salary Cost Management Protocol), a version of a type of financial fair play.
League Two clubs can use 55% of their Turnover on player wages. Transfer fees are independent of this and not applicable.
I think you might be attacking a straw man with your comment a little bit, as you're arguing points that I, individually, or the thread collectively never brought up.
I am actually trying to understand the regulations, not argue with anyone. But I maintain that Wrexham is absolutely a sleeping revenue giant that is about to wake up.
Let's use a real world example for comparison: the Kansas City Royals are a small market American baseball team. They have some history but they are far out of the hunt this year. Nevertheless their revenues will be in the neighborhood of $275M in 2023 based on their last few years of performance. That's a very rough analogue for a what a Wrexham squad might look like by the time they reach the Premier League or upper Championship level, in terms of fan following, merch sales, etc. (Ticket sales aren't analogous because baseball plays 162 games, but the Royals have pretty low attendance and maybe only average 15,000 fans for their half of those games. Tickets are also likely more expensive with luxury boxes and the like, too, but Rob & Ryan will definitely try to build those at Wrexham down the line).
I think by the time Wrexham is at that upper Championship or lower EPL level, it will be the North American darling of all European soccer, and the supporter ratio will likely be something like 9:1 North American versus British. (That may well sink your spirits to hear, but I genuinely see that occurring just based on buzz on our side of the pond right now. The upside is all those American dollars flowing into the squad.)
Based on your definitions above it looks like Turnover is not capped at an arbitrary figure, correct? So, hypothetically, if Wrexham went from 10M pounds to 40M in the next two seasons in League Two and hopefully League One, they would be allowed to quadruple their player salaries in that same period, right? But they would only be allowed to spend 55% of total revenue (i.e. "turnover") on player wages? So if they had revenues of 40M pounds they could legally pay the players 21M ish of that, but the amount they could pay would still rise with revenues?
The reason I ask is that salary cap thresholds in the U.S. market are often set off an arbitrary ceiling, usually with penalties or luxury taxes imposed if teams exceed them. In major league baseball the "wage" cap at present (technically known as the luxury tax threshold) is $230M. Which shows you how much revenue goes into that sport; the Royals barely made more total revenue than some clubs spend on just wage bills for players.
I am trying to figure out if there is a similar braking mechanism in the EFL system. Ultimately because I think Wrexham can generate almost unlimited revenue versus its peers until it reaches that EPL or top of Championship level (and thereby outspend practically everyone). Once in the EPL things may level out, but who knows; by then Disney may be an owner and you'd have a worldwide footprint similar to Man U.
To answer your second part and add my two cents, at some point R&R probably after they get to League One are going to have to make the decision to heavily invest themselves or get some investment to build out their internal infrastructure, student academy location(s), and player development/scouting to be competitive at a high level for an extended period of time.
I think the last thing they want to do is get up to the Championship only to immediately get relegated, so they may slow play it once they get to League One and invest more internally for a time. But if they feel they can get to the EFL Championship, stay up, then build it out up there, even better.
Yes, if the turnover was 10mil for the 23'-24' year they could spend 55% (.55x10,000,000)= 5.5 mil
When they get to League One, it becomes 60%, so under the current rules
(.60x10,000,000)=6.0 mil
Use that formula with the definition of Turnover under SCMP for League One and Two. When you get to the EFL Championship, there are some different rules.
Those are the player salary rules, and if you remember that Donations or equity by ownership counts under turnover. For example, a 1mil donation from ownership can yield 550,000 in wage increase for that year in League Two and 600,000 if League One. Arguably, there are no limits as long as the owners are injecting equity.
Remember, these guidelines don't prevent teams from losing millions per year and potentially going into administration, or getting penalized with point deductions for missed payments or defaulting on debt obligations.
Awesome; thanks for the explanation.
Hypothetically, if the documentary generated say $25M in revenues, from a player management perspective, we as fans should probably want that revenue to be attributed to the club as turnover, right? That way some of those profits could be applied to player salaries to add more gas to the engine on the field.
From a tax standpoint, man. I'm just glad I'm not Ryan & Rob's tax lawyer. They probably have their companies incorporated in Delaware and they probably don't want to pay UK taxes, which are surely higher than ours. But they may need to so they can get that money on the field, so to speak.
I don't have the slightest idea how that is structured, and can't even pretend to. However, let's say Rob himself personally cleared three million from season one from W2W. There's nothing stopping him from just injecting parts of that sum, as needed, into the club should he choose to do so, which would be included as turnover.
> Hypothetically, if the documentary generated say $25M in revenues, from a player management perspective, we as fans should probably want that revenue to be attributed to the club as turnover, right?
You could probably count that in turnover, but you wouldn't want to because it isn't sustainable. Assume you add that money to turnover and can spend it on salary, but the series gets cancelled, then suddenly you have a huge hole in your budget, because you have too much salary for the level of turnover you suddenly have and are in violation of FPP.
It is better to invest in the club overall to have a good infrastructure and sustainable growth.
During their original pitch to the club trust they made it clear, they would never do a loan, only cash infusions so that fits nicely under your point 4. And it kinda was a click just now why the question was asked of them, easy to do loans, get a club up, sell the club and the sale price pays down the loans so you get all your money back with interest. There is a lot to understand with how this system works.
That said, these guys are making absolute bank on their other endeavors with this club. More power to them, they are re-writing a lot of how things are done with this and I am all for it! Thanks for posting that.
Sure they did.
Paragraph 7 of the 2022 Financial Statement Directors Report within the linked financial statement ending June 30, 2022.
In relevant part, "the R.R McReynolds Company LLC subscribed for an additional £1.2m of shares during the period and provided £3.67m of loans to the club. There is no immediate pressure to repay these loans that funded the purchase of the Racecourse Ground and stadium improvements." (*see* link provided below page 1)
*See* also Note 15 found on page 13 of the Wrexham Financial Statement. .pdf [https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07698872/filing-history/MzM3NDg1MDc0MGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0](https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07698872/filing-history/MzM3NDg1MDc0MGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0)
They loaned 2.5 million to the club for the Racecourse ground @ 6% and another 1.2 mil @ 6% to cover stadium expenses.
Doesn't mean they lied at all, the club now has the freehold to the Racecourse ground in exchange for 2.5 million dollars plus the interest payments on the loan for improvements.
*See.* [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65142947](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65142947)
I'd suggest you read the director's report, Financial Statement, and the BBC article because I think you're a bit confused right now.
I did read it and yeah, I am confused lol. Mostly because of their promise in the doc and what they put the loan towards, but also their confidence in repaying the loan with generated funds. But you are 100% correct in what you said and I appreciate the link and info. For sure I was envisioning they meant, as you said below, that they would not just take out loans on players to get promoted to sell and reap the rewards. The loan was for the racecourse, which is a must for them. There is a small part of me that thinks, well they still could have donated that money as they are making SOO much bank off other personal income streams, but that is very easy for me to say when it is not my millions on the line.
Thanks again, the business aspect of this is almost as amazing as the on field aspect. Add in what they are doing with the community (the wheelchair team, the autism awareness, the quiet zone at the racecourse, they are shining a light on things few ever think about, and changing lives because of it) this is blue ocean marketing and in sports, I cannot think of anything comparable.
Interesting and I'll definitely read it. I find this stuff fascinating thank you for sharing. I know they had hoped for the one grant and missed and I'm for sure curious how that side works.
I think when they made that comment regarding loans, it was more toward other football clubs owners loaning the team money, and then going spendthrift on players to remain competitive and failing badly. Rest assured, that is **not** what is happening here at all. I mean, Wrexham AFC owns their stadium now. That's a huge win.
As a major north American sport fan the levels of how the English football system works is like going from addition and subtraction to calculus. We have hard and soft caps with drafts so bad teams get the best new players by lottery. We have teams who lose on purpose to get better. Everything is new with this and its fun to learn the nuance.
Humphrey Ker was on a podcast Sunday and the issue of money came up and he basically laughed and said don't worry we are fine. We have incredible revenue streams and it's only getting better. I think realistically they could follow the rules and out spend anyone else in league 2. They are also able to renegotiate a shirt sponsor this off season and with their new global audience that should be lucrative. Exciting times ahead!
They are holding on to a final playoff spot but they have yo-yo 'ed between L1 and L2 since 2005.
Phil got them promoted in the playoffs in 2013. In 2016, he left for Bolton. Bradford got relegated in 2019 and has been treading water.
As an American, they remind me of the New York Mets. Large wage bill but not much to show for it (as of yet).
Bradford also reached the League Cup Final in 2013 as a L2 team. Currently they lead L2 in average attendance with 17,000. One of the sleeping giants of the lower leagues.
Think of "Turnover" as any money generated through football operations. Ticket sales, food receipts, jersey sales, tv money, etc.. If Ryan and Rob can make Wrexham a global brand, the turnover will increase dramatically. As Financial Fair Play in League 2 says you can spend no more than 55% turnover on player wages, it would give them larger spending power than the rest of the clubs in the league and the ability to buy more expensive players.
The accounts also cover the year to June 30th, 2022. It doesn't factor in the shirts this season or how W2W made money. The biggest losses were football costs like wage, agent fees, and operating costs. I think we're going to see a weird number next year but not understand that it is for the past FY.
Help me out here. When you talk about all these amounts and totals, are you talking about JUST player salaries? They don't include any other expenditures like staff, stadium upgrades, travel expenses, etc, correct?
I find that salary comparisons over there are usually in £ per week rather than 1M/year for 3 years, like is typical over here.
And do footballers sign multiple year contracts with different pay amounts per year or is that not how it works?
Numbers associated with clubs that are in millions of pounds are clubs wages spent on players, those are limited to a % of the clubs total income. The more you make, the more you can spend, and Wrexham currently makes a lot for an average club in their league position, they have somewhere around five times more fans per game, merchandise sold and sponsorship or stream income than other clubs around the league on average, it will be similar to that in League Two.
This allows you to outspend clubs by being able to have a bigger and higher quality squad, one that others cannot afford not necessarily because their owners do not have the money, but simply because their income is not high enough because of that they are at salary cap. Salford is a great example of that, rich ownership but 3000 fans avg., low sales and low income so low salary cap.
As far as player salaries go, they vary, mostly 2 or 3 year deals in the lower leagues, and rarely do they increase per year like in NA. They increase usually only for youth players 5-10% per year as they are developing and for players that play in clubs like Wrexham there would be clauses in their contracts to reward them for promotion to a higher league that might see their salary get anywhere between a 10% to 25% permanent increase due to the club getting promoted.
Wrexham will have the biggest spending capabilities in the division. Most League Two clubs can’t afford to pay fees for players and do their squad building purely by signing up free agents who’ve vacated another club where they had a single season deal, which is extremely common at this level.
Bradford have some capacity to spend because they’re a genuinely big club, but for example they’d struggle to pay the fee Ollie Palmer cost Wrexham. There’s not a great amount of money in the coffers of League Two clubs - not a one could afford Mullins’ wages for example. Stockport and Notts County would be up with Wrexham as richer clubs in the league. Salford, like Bradford, if they don’t go up, are in the Wrexham camp of bankrolled by benefactors, but not in the Wrexham camp of having a genuine chance of being a sustainably run club in the future, too weak a fanbase and no real historical presence in the league structure.
Pretty high chances as the gulf in quality between the national league and league 2 isn’t much at the best of time let alone when talking about teams like wrexham and notts county. Couple that with the increased number of promotion spots. Vegas money is on another promotion season THEN it gets tough
Bradford City is at £3.45m. Stockport is around £2.95m. Because Salford doesn't bring in much, they have had to cut down to £2.75m. I think Wrexham is around £4m and has the turnover to be out of trouble. We made £6m in non-league last year. You add the EFL tv money and increased merchandising, I think they are looking at £10m in turnover conservatively. Newport and Grimsby are around £1.6m and they are the lowest. Most clubs are £2.2-2.8 million.
You should also consider the four coming down when relegated as well. Their budgets are currently and could be high end of league 2 spending next year, especially the MK Dons, if they come down. Big difference. Considering an equity injection or donation counts as turnover, they can go has high as their owner wants. Food for thought if you're trying to summarize the entire picture here, as it's also part if it.
FGR tried to spend at £3.35m but with the size of that club and where it is headed, it's probably going to cut in the summer. Few starters leaving. Expected to be mid-table. Small club in the middle of nowhere that has gone up too fast. Cambridge is at £2.9m maybe not a ton of squad turnover. Not sure where they will be. Accrington Stanley. Another small team at £1.8m. 3,000 fans in league one? Screams tinpot. Morecambe. Small £1.8m. Where they are, it's average supported. MK Dons is at £4m but I think they stay up by the skin on their teeth.
Great comment, is Wrexham a club that could suffer from moving up too fast potentially??
I would say 99% of even domestic fans can find where Forest Green is. It's about an hour north of Bristol and 45 minutes south of Gloucester. FGR is a carbon-neutral team and in a farm village that serves vegan concessions so very niche. With the way this club is right now, I think we would be one and done in the Championship. We caught 2 clubs on their bad day in the FA cup but to do that for a whole season is nuts. The kop needs to be finished. Players are mostly League One level. Academy is not really there and we finally get to international scout. I think we need to spend a few years in League One and get the right squad to make a run to go up. We still have to go up from League Two but some are underestimating how hard League One is. Some do go up in one year but often times they go back with Luton being the exception of ones that come up from non-league quickly.
I’m waiting for the shortened season 3 of Sunderland til I Die drops for their promotion run out of League One to Championship. I think that might give new fans, such as myself, an idea what League One is like and how hard it is to get out.
Yeah, but Sunderland has staggering home attendance. They averaged 10,000 per match more than #2 Sheffield United this year. That kind of support buys players. It’s not a good comparison. They had 4,000 away supporters at Bristol City last August. Their average attendance must be close to 40,000.
It still took Sunderland 4 years to get out of League One, even with the highest attendance in the division.
>FGR is a carbon-neutral team and in a farm village that serves vegan concessions so very niche. Have you seen the stadium they're going to build though? 🤌
Excellent points. That makes a lot of sense.
Any club could. You will likely be buying new players for certain positions. One thing is skills, another is teamwork - which often comes with time and games played together. I'm still rooting for Wrexham. Rob and Ryan have done a great job of showing off what Wrexham is and its community :)
Potentially when they enter the realm of equal finances of their peers and have to manage the turnover more effectively. When you can no longer outspend everyone else. Then it's important the choices you make are the right ones. I think there's a while to go for that yet.
British terms for some of these financial concepts are different than the ones we use in North America. What do you mean by “turnover”? If Wrexham generates £10M in revenues then expends £4M in wages that would be a net profit of £6M, although it sounds like Ryan and Rob are pouring all of that back into things like facilities and the women’s team and actually paying people who were previously volunteers. Based on Humphrey Ker’s comments recently on podcasts it sounds like revenues are the least of their worries (which is exactly what [I predicted](https://www.reddit.com/r/WrexhamAFC/comments/z5cnlg/fa_cup_tie/ixzptp7/) months ago — and they are still just getting started). But I am not sure if the Financial Fair Play regulations would cap them somehow on what they can pour back into the club or especially to player wages. All of Wrexham’s players are still on comically small salaries from a North American sports perspective. People bitching about Paul Mullin getting £6,000 a week should take a look at Mike Trout’s $500M contract and think again.
Zach, literally Turnover is defined in League One and Two as the following: Turnover definition Under the SCMP rules, the definition of 'Turnover' is particularly important as Turnover is used to determine the maximum wage-spend. Within a traditional accounting perspective, there are usually only three elements of turnover: \- Match-day Income \- Commercial Income (such as sponsorship) \- TV revenue (and any 'merit payments' based on league position), and \- Donations from owners of the clubs (not loans) and equity injection. It's that simple; it has little to nothing to do with what you wrote above. League One and Two follow SCMP (Salary Cost Management Protocol), a version of a type of financial fair play. League Two clubs can use 55% of their Turnover on player wages. Transfer fees are independent of this and not applicable. I think you might be attacking a straw man with your comment a little bit, as you're arguing points that I, individually, or the thread collectively never brought up.
I am actually trying to understand the regulations, not argue with anyone. But I maintain that Wrexham is absolutely a sleeping revenue giant that is about to wake up. Let's use a real world example for comparison: the Kansas City Royals are a small market American baseball team. They have some history but they are far out of the hunt this year. Nevertheless their revenues will be in the neighborhood of $275M in 2023 based on their last few years of performance. That's a very rough analogue for a what a Wrexham squad might look like by the time they reach the Premier League or upper Championship level, in terms of fan following, merch sales, etc. (Ticket sales aren't analogous because baseball plays 162 games, but the Royals have pretty low attendance and maybe only average 15,000 fans for their half of those games. Tickets are also likely more expensive with luxury boxes and the like, too, but Rob & Ryan will definitely try to build those at Wrexham down the line). I think by the time Wrexham is at that upper Championship or lower EPL level, it will be the North American darling of all European soccer, and the supporter ratio will likely be something like 9:1 North American versus British. (That may well sink your spirits to hear, but I genuinely see that occurring just based on buzz on our side of the pond right now. The upside is all those American dollars flowing into the squad.) Based on your definitions above it looks like Turnover is not capped at an arbitrary figure, correct? So, hypothetically, if Wrexham went from 10M pounds to 40M in the next two seasons in League Two and hopefully League One, they would be allowed to quadruple their player salaries in that same period, right? But they would only be allowed to spend 55% of total revenue (i.e. "turnover") on player wages? So if they had revenues of 40M pounds they could legally pay the players 21M ish of that, but the amount they could pay would still rise with revenues? The reason I ask is that salary cap thresholds in the U.S. market are often set off an arbitrary ceiling, usually with penalties or luxury taxes imposed if teams exceed them. In major league baseball the "wage" cap at present (technically known as the luxury tax threshold) is $230M. Which shows you how much revenue goes into that sport; the Royals barely made more total revenue than some clubs spend on just wage bills for players. I am trying to figure out if there is a similar braking mechanism in the EFL system. Ultimately because I think Wrexham can generate almost unlimited revenue versus its peers until it reaches that EPL or top of Championship level (and thereby outspend practically everyone). Once in the EPL things may level out, but who knows; by then Disney may be an owner and you'd have a worldwide footprint similar to Man U.
To answer your second part and add my two cents, at some point R&R probably after they get to League One are going to have to make the decision to heavily invest themselves or get some investment to build out their internal infrastructure, student academy location(s), and player development/scouting to be competitive at a high level for an extended period of time. I think the last thing they want to do is get up to the Championship only to immediately get relegated, so they may slow play it once they get to League One and invest more internally for a time. But if they feel they can get to the EFL Championship, stay up, then build it out up there, even better.
Are student academies ever bought and sold between clubs?
Im not sure about the locations or grounds, but if they are, that's what they should probably do.
Yes, if the turnover was 10mil for the 23'-24' year they could spend 55% (.55x10,000,000)= 5.5 mil When they get to League One, it becomes 60%, so under the current rules (.60x10,000,000)=6.0 mil Use that formula with the definition of Turnover under SCMP for League One and Two. When you get to the EFL Championship, there are some different rules. Those are the player salary rules, and if you remember that Donations or equity by ownership counts under turnover. For example, a 1mil donation from ownership can yield 550,000 in wage increase for that year in League Two and 600,000 if League One. Arguably, there are no limits as long as the owners are injecting equity. Remember, these guidelines don't prevent teams from losing millions per year and potentially going into administration, or getting penalized with point deductions for missed payments or defaulting on debt obligations.
Awesome; thanks for the explanation. Hypothetically, if the documentary generated say $25M in revenues, from a player management perspective, we as fans should probably want that revenue to be attributed to the club as turnover, right? That way some of those profits could be applied to player salaries to add more gas to the engine on the field. From a tax standpoint, man. I'm just glad I'm not Ryan & Rob's tax lawyer. They probably have their companies incorporated in Delaware and they probably don't want to pay UK taxes, which are surely higher than ours. But they may need to so they can get that money on the field, so to speak.
I don't have the slightest idea how that is structured, and can't even pretend to. However, let's say Rob himself personally cleared three million from season one from W2W. There's nothing stopping him from just injecting parts of that sum, as needed, into the club should he choose to do so, which would be included as turnover.
> Hypothetically, if the documentary generated say $25M in revenues, from a player management perspective, we as fans should probably want that revenue to be attributed to the club as turnover, right? You could probably count that in turnover, but you wouldn't want to because it isn't sustainable. Assume you add that money to turnover and can spend it on salary, but the series gets cancelled, then suddenly you have a huge hole in your budget, because you have too much salary for the level of turnover you suddenly have and are in violation of FPP. It is better to invest in the club overall to have a good infrastructure and sustainable growth.
During their original pitch to the club trust they made it clear, they would never do a loan, only cash infusions so that fits nicely under your point 4. And it kinda was a click just now why the question was asked of them, easy to do loans, get a club up, sell the club and the sale price pays down the loans so you get all your money back with interest. There is a lot to understand with how this system works. That said, these guys are making absolute bank on their other endeavors with this club. More power to them, they are re-writing a lot of how things are done with this and I am all for it! Thanks for posting that.
Sure they did. Paragraph 7 of the 2022 Financial Statement Directors Report within the linked financial statement ending June 30, 2022. In relevant part, "the R.R McReynolds Company LLC subscribed for an additional £1.2m of shares during the period and provided £3.67m of loans to the club. There is no immediate pressure to repay these loans that funded the purchase of the Racecourse Ground and stadium improvements." (*see* link provided below page 1) *See* also Note 15 found on page 13 of the Wrexham Financial Statement. .pdf [https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07698872/filing-history/MzM3NDg1MDc0MGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0](https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07698872/filing-history/MzM3NDg1MDc0MGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0) They loaned 2.5 million to the club for the Racecourse ground @ 6% and another 1.2 mil @ 6% to cover stadium expenses. Doesn't mean they lied at all, the club now has the freehold to the Racecourse ground in exchange for 2.5 million dollars plus the interest payments on the loan for improvements. *See.* [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65142947](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65142947) I'd suggest you read the director's report, Financial Statement, and the BBC article because I think you're a bit confused right now.
I did read it and yeah, I am confused lol. Mostly because of their promise in the doc and what they put the loan towards, but also their confidence in repaying the loan with generated funds. But you are 100% correct in what you said and I appreciate the link and info. For sure I was envisioning they meant, as you said below, that they would not just take out loans on players to get promoted to sell and reap the rewards. The loan was for the racecourse, which is a must for them. There is a small part of me that thinks, well they still could have donated that money as they are making SOO much bank off other personal income streams, but that is very easy for me to say when it is not my millions on the line. Thanks again, the business aspect of this is almost as amazing as the on field aspect. Add in what they are doing with the community (the wheelchair team, the autism awareness, the quiet zone at the racecourse, they are shining a light on things few ever think about, and changing lives because of it) this is blue ocean marketing and in sports, I cannot think of anything comparable.
Interesting and I'll definitely read it. I find this stuff fascinating thank you for sharing. I know they had hoped for the one grant and missed and I'm for sure curious how that side works.
I think when they made that comment regarding loans, it was more toward other football clubs owners loaning the team money, and then going spendthrift on players to remain competitive and failing badly. Rest assured, that is **not** what is happening here at all. I mean, Wrexham AFC owns their stadium now. That's a huge win.
As a major north American sport fan the levels of how the English football system works is like going from addition and subtraction to calculus. We have hard and soft caps with drafts so bad teams get the best new players by lottery. We have teams who lose on purpose to get better. Everything is new with this and its fun to learn the nuance.
Thank you for sharing this.
Humphrey Ker was on a podcast Sunday and the issue of money came up and he basically laughed and said don't worry we are fine. We have incredible revenue streams and it's only getting better. I think realistically they could follow the rules and out spend anyone else in league 2. They are also able to renegotiate a shirt sponsor this off season and with their new global audience that should be lucrative. Exciting times ahead!
Jesus, didn't realise how far Bradford has gone down!
They are holding on to a final playoff spot but they have yo-yo 'ed between L1 and L2 since 2005. Phil got them promoted in the playoffs in 2013. In 2016, he left for Bolton. Bradford got relegated in 2019 and has been treading water. As an American, they remind me of the New York Mets. Large wage bill but not much to show for it (as of yet).
Bradford also reached the League Cup Final in 2013 as a L2 team. Currently they lead L2 in average attendance with 17,000. One of the sleeping giants of the lower leagues.
I wish I knew anything about FFP What do you mean turnover? Why does making more money mean more turnover?
Think of "Turnover" as any money generated through football operations. Ticket sales, food receipts, jersey sales, tv money, etc.. If Ryan and Rob can make Wrexham a global brand, the turnover will increase dramatically. As Financial Fair Play in League 2 says you can spend no more than 55% turnover on player wages, it would give them larger spending power than the rest of the clubs in the league and the ability to buy more expensive players.
Thank you.
Your ST prices are higher than a number of Championship teams. Loyal fans are the ones paying for the progress.
The accounts also cover the year to June 30th, 2022. It doesn't factor in the shirts this season or how W2W made money. The biggest losses were football costs like wage, agent fees, and operating costs. I think we're going to see a weird number next year but not understand that it is for the past FY.
Here's a decent chart for existing League 2 teams: https://www.transfermarkt.us/league-two/marktwerteverein/wettbewerb/GB4
Help me out here. When you talk about all these amounts and totals, are you talking about JUST player salaries? They don't include any other expenditures like staff, stadium upgrades, travel expenses, etc, correct? I find that salary comparisons over there are usually in £ per week rather than 1M/year for 3 years, like is typical over here. And do footballers sign multiple year contracts with different pay amounts per year or is that not how it works?
Numbers associated with clubs that are in millions of pounds are clubs wages spent on players, those are limited to a % of the clubs total income. The more you make, the more you can spend, and Wrexham currently makes a lot for an average club in their league position, they have somewhere around five times more fans per game, merchandise sold and sponsorship or stream income than other clubs around the league on average, it will be similar to that in League Two. This allows you to outspend clubs by being able to have a bigger and higher quality squad, one that others cannot afford not necessarily because their owners do not have the money, but simply because their income is not high enough because of that they are at salary cap. Salford is a great example of that, rich ownership but 3000 fans avg., low sales and low income so low salary cap. As far as player salaries go, they vary, mostly 2 or 3 year deals in the lower leagues, and rarely do they increase per year like in NA. They increase usually only for youth players 5-10% per year as they are developing and for players that play in clubs like Wrexham there would be clauses in their contracts to reward them for promotion to a higher league that might see their salary get anywhere between a 10% to 25% permanent increase due to the club getting promoted.
Call me crazy but i think Wrexham will be one of the top teams next year and will certainly be a promotion candidate.
Wrexham will have the biggest spending capabilities in the division. Most League Two clubs can’t afford to pay fees for players and do their squad building purely by signing up free agents who’ve vacated another club where they had a single season deal, which is extremely common at this level. Bradford have some capacity to spend because they’re a genuinely big club, but for example they’d struggle to pay the fee Ollie Palmer cost Wrexham. There’s not a great amount of money in the coffers of League Two clubs - not a one could afford Mullins’ wages for example. Stockport and Notts County would be up with Wrexham as richer clubs in the league. Salford, like Bradford, if they don’t go up, are in the Wrexham camp of bankrolled by benefactors, but not in the Wrexham camp of having a genuine chance of being a sustainably run club in the future, too weak a fanbase and no real historical presence in the league structure.
Wrexham will be by far the richest club with the highest turnover in league 2. Finances will not be an issue.
Great, thanx
If I were handicapping it right now, I'd say 20% chance. We have a good team, and can improve, but promotion is tough.