{"id":17250,"date":"2021-11-09T09:26:10","date_gmt":"2021-11-09T09:26:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/etims.net\/?p=17250"},"modified":"2021-11-09T09:26:10","modified_gmt":"2021-11-09T09:26:10","slug":"celtic-diary-tuesday-november-9-accounts-and-accountability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/etims.net\/?p=17250","title":{"rendered":"Celtic Diary Tuesday November 9: Accounts and Accountability"},"content":{"rendered":"

We tend not to look into financial analysis too much in the diary, largely because I’m not an expert. My financial expertise stretches only to making sure I’ve got some money left when the barman shouts last orders, and avoiding that meltdown of running out before he does.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

However, over on Twitter, @swissramble\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>seems a little more astute…and a big thank you for the work he’s put in, as it makes it clearer for the rest of us.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

It’s a long piece, but it’s worth sticking with, as it is entirely factual. sure, he draws plenty of conclusions, but they appear to be entirely neutral, so don’t expect the SMSM to pick up on it any time soon.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Oh, and so have I, which are in italics.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a02020\/21 accounts cover a \u201cmost difficult financial year\u201d, badly impacted by COVID. Also disappointing on the pitch, as they finished runners-up in the league, were knocked out of both domestic cup competitions in early stages and eliminated after Europa League group.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0swung from \u00a30.1m pre-tax profit to \u00a311.5m loss (\u00a312.6m after tax), as revenue fell \u00a39m (13%) from \u00a370m to \u00a361m and profit on player sales fell \u00a315m from \u00a324m to \u00a39m, partly offset by \u00a35m other income (business interruption coverage) and \u00a39m (9%) reduction in expenses.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0No surprises in there, of course revenue was going to be down during an interruption to business. What’s notable is that although the support retained their, er, support, the board still managed to keep the lights on without too juch trouble<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0revenue \u201cattrition\u201d was driven by match day, which dropped \u00a315.0m (42%) from \u00a335.8m to \u00a320.8m, and broadcasting, down \u00a32.4m (18%) from \u00a313.7m to \u00a311.3m, though the net effect was eased by commercial, which rose \u00a3\u00a37.9m (38%) from \u00a320.8m to \u00a328.7m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0mitigated revenue losses by \u201ctight cost control\u201d with lower wages, down \u00a34.5m (8%) from (restated) \u00a356.2m to \u00a351.7m; player amortisation, down \u00a30.4m to \u00a311.8m; player impairment, down \u00a32.1m; and other expenses, down \u00a31.7m (8%). Includes \u00a30.6m for Neil Lennon departure.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0If there are any headlines generated by this piece, they will be around the news that Neil Lennon got a pay off of \u00a3600,000. It will have been in his contract, and therefore unavoidable. Given the uncertainty surrounding the early months of the plague, it’s unlikely that he would have easily been replaced if sacked, and stories that he wouldn;t resign so as to secure his pay off may have been close to the mark, but looking at it in context, it’s a small price to pay for what appears to be a change of culture at the club and possibly a huge step forward.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Alright, almost certainly a huge step forward.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a312.6m loss after tax is obviously not great, but to put this into perspective it was only around half the \u00a324.2m deficit reported by their rivals Rangers. The much smaller losses (and profits) at other Scottish clubs are from 2019\/20, less impacted by COVID.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
Clearly, the pandemic has had a major impact on the financials at all clubs with the cumulative revenue loss for\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0over the past two years estimated as \u00a324.7m (2019\/20 \u00a39.4m and 2020\/21 \u00a315.2m), mainly due to playing games behind closed doors.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0It’s a massive loss, however you look at it, and comparing it to other clubs isn;t really the point. The point is that the losses have been recouped with the sales of Ajer, Edoaurd and Christie\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
COVID had a major impact on football in 2020\/21 with many leading clubs posting huge losses, e.g. Barcelona \u00a3422m, Inter \u00a3215m, Juventus \u00a3184m & Roma \u00a3163m. In contrast\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0relatively small \u00a313m loss \u201cdemonstrated the importance of maintaining a sustainable business model.\u201d\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0You can see why some clubs looked to form a breakaway super league, with their eyes firmly on a new television deal.\u00a0 They panicked, and again, when looked at in the context of the early plague days, you can see why.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0We can criticise our board for a lot of things, but in this instance, they “kept the heid “.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Furthermore,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0profit on player sales fell \u00a314.8m from \u00a324.2m to \u00a39.4m, though still by far the highest in Scotland, e.g. Rangers only made \u00a31.7m. Included Frimpong to Bayer Leverkusen, Klimala to NY Red Bulls & Hendry to KV Oostende, while prior year had Tierney to\u00a0#AFC<\/a>.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0pre-tax loss in 2020\/21 is the first since 2014\/15, breaking a sequence of five profitable years in a row. In fact, they have generated profits in seven of the last nine seasons, amounting to a net \u00a342m gain over that period, despite last year\u2019s \u00a311m deficit.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0This will be overlooked by everyone in the media. Curiously, where Celtic make money consistently, it’s overlooked, almost as though any previous profits don’t count in the overall welfare of a club, because a little pixie steals the debit card and runs off with it. If a club or company loses money year in year out, however, only the current figure is reported….<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0player trading is \u201cfundamental\u201d to their self-sustaining business model with an impressive \u00a368m profits delivered in the last four years (excluding this summer\u2019s sales). Money earned also includes sell-on fees from past sales, e.g. van Dijk from Southampton to\u00a0#LFC<\/a>.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a02020\/21 accounts do not include the big money sales of Odsonne Edouard to\u00a0#CPFC<\/a>, Kristoffer Ajer to Brentford and Ryan Christie to Bournemouth, which are worth around \u00a334m in sales proceeds, so will return the club to profit in 2021\/22.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
Profits from player sales have made a big difference to\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0bottom line. As a result, in the last nine years they have generated \u00a3112m profit from player trading, compared to just \u00a38m in the same period for Rangers.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0In a nutshell, all of the money lost by “rangers ” in their short but hilarious existence would have been recouped of they had raised the same in transfers as Celtic….though that would have been easier if they had similar levels of quality to put on the market, and not just fat forwards, Liverpool reserves and a right back who is limited to penalty kicks.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0operating loss (i.e. excluding player sales) improved from \u00a324.5m to \u00a320.7m in 2020\/21, though this is still down from \u00a35m profit 4 years ago. Although most clubs post operating losses, Celtic\u2019s is second highest in Scotland, only surpassed by Rangers \u00a323.5m deficit.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0revenue has fallen \u00a341m from \u00a3102m peak three years ago to \u00a361m, which is the lowest since \u00a352m in 2016. The decline is due to a combination of COVID and failure to qualify for Champions League, which has driven decreases in match day \u00a322m and broadcasting \u00a323m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0There, in black and white is our business model. Champions League football and selling players that have been develped to such a level as to earn lucrative moves to wealthier clubs.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0On that basis, it’s quite unfathomable that Neil Lennon ever got a second shot at managing the club.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Better players leads to more champions League money which allows for a higher level of investment and more success in the champions League which leads to higher revenues from player sales and matchday and other merchandise.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Piece of piss this financial analysis lark.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0have enjoyed a substantial revenue advantage over their rivals Rangers in recent times, but the gap has narrowed over the last four years from \u00a369m in 2018 to \u00a313m in 2021 (Celtic \u00a361m vs. Rangers \u00a348m).\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Following on form the revelation that the money we need to prosper comes from outwith Scotland, it again becomes unfathomable why we need “rangers ” at all….\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Of course, the big two Glasgow clubs generate significantly more revenue than the rest of the Scottish Premiership. Even after the impact of COVID,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a361m is still more than four times as much as Aberdeen \u00a314m, followed by Hearts \u00a312m, Hibernian \u00a39m and Kilmarnock \u00a35m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Thats down to the misgovernance of the SFA, and their obsession with the old firm brand, in particular one half of it.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0If they had generated more money through sponsorship and tv deals, then other clubs would have had a bigger share. Their refusal to promote the game beyond the old form is a shocking dereliction of duty.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Factor in the toxicity of one club, and the way they’ve been allowed to infect everyone else, and you can see why no one wants to be associated with Scottish football.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Maybe change here should be the focus of all fans, and not just on how it affects Celtic.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
However, like others outside the Big Five leagues,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0are still faced by a major revenue challenge, e.g. their \u00a370m revenue in 2019\/20 was less than half the \u00a3130m required to be in the Top 30 European clubs, as shown by the Deloitte Money League global ranking.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
This might seem like a spurious comparison, but the fact is that in 2004\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0were placed as high as 13th in the Money League. Since then, their revenue is essentially flat, while the club in 20th place has increased by \u00a397m and the top club by \u00a3456m (higher pre-COVID).\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0In 2004, Celtic were genuinely feared on the pitch across Europe, and with more investment would have grown even stronger. However, austerity kicked in, cutting back on expenditure, largely recognised as untenable, where perhaps a drive for more investment to fund such growth may have been wiser.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
thanks, Peter, thanks Dermot….\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
This is at the heart of\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0issue, i.e. they are the proverbial big fish in a small pond. In 2019\/20 the Scottish Premiership generated \u00a3221m revenue, miles behind England \u00a35.1 bln and Germany \u00a33.2 bln, but also below the likes of Austria \u00a3266m and Switzerland \u00a3229m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0They conservative nature of our board seems to have accepted that, and indeed encouraged it. Remember the top deck beng closed under Deila ? They sold that to us as a reason to perpetuate the Old firm myth, and the support are not entirely free of blame here, becuase we largely bought into it.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Some still see beating an entirely new entity in the same way as when they were a real club. That has helped their regeneration, and encouraged the media to promote the brand.<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Of course, any comparison is a little misleading, as English clubs benefit from huge TV money, but if we compare\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a361m revenue with, say,\u00a0Ajax \u00a3110m, there is still a \u00a349m shortfall. Celtic\u2019s match day is higher, but commercial and Europe TV money are much lower.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Ajax are the model we should be studying. they make money and have success in Europe. Many years ago they studied Jock Steins total football and improved on it from a business point of view. We should copy their business model to improve from a playing point of view.<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0broadcasting revenue decreased \u00a32.4m (18%) from \u00a313.7m to \u00a311.3m, due to dropping to second place in the Scottish Premiership and not progressing beyond the Europa League group stage. This revenue stream has now fallen three years in a row and is below Rangers \u00a318.9m.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
The SPFL has not yet published details of TV distributions for 2020\/21, but\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0only received \u00a33.4m for winning the title the previous season, which pales into insignificance compared to many European leagues, e.g. last place in Premier League is worth around \u00a3100m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Incredibly, despite poor relations with tv companies and media, including blackouts and sulks, there is still substantial broadcast revenue going into Ibrox, which may be down to Gerrard’s name, but could also be that more people watch them. Many Celts watch them,. whereas I’d doubt too many of their fans watch Celtic. After all, they’re not interested in quality football.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
There was a new 5-year Scottish TV deal with Sky Sports worth \u00a330m (\u20ac34m) a year from 2020\/21 (up from \u00a325m), but this is not going to move the needle by much. It\u2019s still much lower than Poland Ekstraklasa \u20ac58m & Belgium Jupiler League \u20ac83m, let alone Premier League \u20ac3.6 bln.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Again, a major failing by those who are responsible for generating income for the Scottish game. Over reliance on the Old Firm has backfired, as it seems to outsiders that is all our game has to offer. We’re not being paid for coverage of the game, we’re being paid for four old firm games.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Based on my estimate,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0earned \u20ac8.7m from Europe in 2021: \u20ac8.0m from the Europa League group stage plus \u20ac0.7m for 2 Champions League qualifying rounds. This was \u20ac3.7m less than prior season \u20ac12.4m (Europa League last 32 \u20ac11.2m plus CL 3 qualifying rounds \u20ac1.1m).\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
European qualification is extremely important for\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>, who have earned \u20ac98m from Europe in last 5 years, \u20ac69m more than Rangers \u20ac29m. Champions League is the real differentiator with Celtic receiving over \u20ac30m in both 2017 and 2018, when they reached group stage.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
It is therefore crucial that recent good performances in Europe by\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0and Rangers have improved Scotland\u2019s UEFA coefficient, so that the 2021\/22 Scottish champions have a decent chance of automatically qualifying for the Champions League group stage.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0match day income fell \u00a315.0m (42%) from \u00a335.8m to \u00a320.8m, as all games played behind closed doors, though fans\u2019 generosity limited the damage. Season ticket holders given streaming service and \u00a350 retail voucher, but that could not fully compensate for live experience.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0The success of all Scottish clubs in Europe should be prioritised. Qualification for group stage football is a big earner, and efforts should be made to restructure the game around European qualification, oinstead of hoping for the best, which can be exciting but not really much use when planning a business strategy.<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a320.8m match day income, net of \u00a32.8m merchandising vouchers, was still higher than Rangers \u00a318.2m, even though this has fallen from an impressive \u00a343.3m two years ago before the pandemic struck. Next highest in Scotland were Hearts \u00a35.1m (2019\/20 figure).\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0average attendance in 2019\/20 was 57,857, nearly 9,000 more than Rangers 49,238, so they will be delighted with fans\u2019 return to the stadium. The 55,000 season ticket holders in 2020\/21, despite uncertainty around return to the stadium, \u201cexceeded all expectations\u201d.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
Match day revenue is particularly important for Scottish clubs, given the low TV deal. According to Deloitte, this accounted for an incredible 48% of total revenue in Scotland in 2018\/19 (pre-pandemic) with the next highest being significantly lower, i.e. Belgium 26%.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0It’s common knowledge that the percentage of the population in Scotland that attends football matches is on a par with anywhere else, and there’s room for improvement even here. Get people into grounds and create the atmosphere that tv companies want. Even if it means freebies for kids, or a push for local companies to back their local teams, anything that shifts focus to the game, and that way it’ll be easier to sell.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Summer football ? Well, we’d have the airwaves and the far eastern gambling markets to ourselves….\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
And , of course, better weather. Let’s face it, as much as we enjoy the game , sitting on a wet seat with the wind around your whereabouts isn’t top class entertainment.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0commercial revenue rose \u00a37.9m (38%) from \u00a320.8m to \u00a328.7m, comprising retail \u00a315.1m, sponsorship \u00a312.4m and other income \u00a31.2m, mainly due to \u201cexceptional\u201d merchandising (record online sales). By far the highest in Scotland, well ahead of Rangers \u00a310.7m.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0new 5-year kit deal with Adidas started in July 2020, reportedly worth \u00a36m a year. The Dafabet shirt sponsorship, described as \u201cthe most lucrative sponsorship agreement in Scottish football history\u201d, has been extended until June 2025.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
In addition to reported revenue,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0accounts include \u00a35m other operating income, which \u201crepresents a recovery derived from Business Interruption coverage\u201d, i.e. some compensation for matches being played behind closed doors.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0wage bill fell \u00a34.5m (8%) from (restated) \u00a356.2m to \u00a351.7m, which means that this has fallen by \u00a37.6m (13%) from the \u00a359.3m peak in 2018, due to payments from Job Retention Scheme, reduced activity due to COVID and lower performance bonuses.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0It’s worth remembering that most players took a pay cut during the pandemic. that would have helped, and it didn;t get the coverage it deserved, presumably in case another club felt that they would have to follow follow.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Similar to revenue, Rangers (\u00a348m) have closed the wages gap to\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0(\u00a352m) from \u00a335m in 2018 to just \u00a34m. However, there remains an abyss between the top two and the other Scottish clubs, e.g. the next highest are Aberdeen \u00a310m, Hearts \u00a39m and Hibernian \u00a37m.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0If, indeed, the wage gap between the two glasgow business allies has shortened, then sooner or later it will become apparent that only one of these clubs can afford to keep paying it. Like the old cold war when the US simply outspent the USSR and caused it’s collapse.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Hang on, have we underestimated our board ? Was that the plan all along ?\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Probably not.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0wages to turnover ratio worsened from 80% to 85%, so has shot up from 58% just three years ago. However, this is still better than Rangers, who are now up to 100%. This metric should improve in 2021\/22 following the return of fans to the stadium.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0One wonders when the media will cover that bit about all of the income at Ibrox is going out on wages….who’d be a face painter these days ?\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Despite investment in the squad,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0player amortisation, the annual cost of writing-off transfer fees, decreased by \u00a30.4m (11%) to \u00a311.8m, though has more than doubled in five years from \u00a35.0m in 2016. Still more than Rangers \u00a310.6m, while all other clubs less than \u00a3500k.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0spent \u00a313.5m on player purchases in 2020\/21, which was down from prior season\u2019s record \u00a320.7m, but still meant a \u00a371m gross outlay in the last 5 years. Net spend was less than \u00a31m. In fact, the last time the club had meaningful net spend was \u00a310m in 2017.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a313.5m player purchases in 2020\/21 were lower than Rangers \u00a316.8m. Both clubs spend significantly more than the rest of the Premiership combined. Acquisitions included Albian Ajeti, Vasilis Barkas and David Turnbull with Shane Duffy and Diego Laxalt arriving on loan.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
It is worth noting that\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a> splashed the cash this summer (relatively speaking) by bringing in \u00a320m worth of players after the arrival of new manager Ange Postecoglou: Furuhashi, Starfelt, Abada, Juranovic, Giakoumakis, Hart, Scales, Shaw and Urhoghide.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0This time it does seem we’ve spent wisely. Pre pandemic, money was spent, but frankly we’ll be lucky to recover it, and happily those behind those moves appear not to be involved in that decision making process any more.\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0gross debt decreased from \u00a35.3m to \u00a34.1m, comprising \u00a32.9m Co-operative bank loans (LIBOR + 3%) plus \u00a31.2m finance leases. The revolving credit facility was increased from \u00a32m to \u00a313m as a buffer, but that had not been utilised at the date of the accounts.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0\u00a34.1m debt is the third largest in Scotland, but is a long way below Rangers \u00a313.2m, which would have been even higher without them converting \u00a360m of loans into shares in the last three seasons. Note: Celtic\u2019s figure excludes \u00a34.2m convertible preference shares.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
After adding back non-cash items and working capital movements,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0had \u00a312m negative operating cash flow, covered by \u00a312m net player sales (sales \u00a326m, purchases \u00a314m). Spent less than \u00a31m on capex, interest and tax, but repaid \u00a32m loans and paid \u00a30.5m dividends.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span>\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
As a result,\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0had \u00a32.9m net cash outflow, so cash balance fell from \u00a322.4m to \u00a319.5m, though still by far the highest in Scotland, almost as much as the rest of the Premiership combined. The club said this gave them \u201ca base to invest in the summer transfer window\u201d.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
Over the last 10 years\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0have had \u00a348m available cash, entirely generated from their operations and player sales. Highest expenditure: infrastructure \u00a320m, debt repayment \u00a310m, dividends \u00a35m, tax \u00a34m and interest \u00a31m. Bank balance increased by \u00a39m.\"Image\"\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0When we criticise the board, we really aren’t going to cut much ice if we mention the books. They seem to have got the hang of that in a way that has escaped our friends across the river. Yet if they were to put the same amount of effort and expertise into taking the club to the next level, you do have to wonder if they’d be equally adept….\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0They do seem to know what they’re doing, and if they weren;t so conservative, we might have been contenders…\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0All ifs and buts, but how can men of proven ability be so lacking in ambition ?\u00a0<\/em><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Comparing\u00a0#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0with Rangers since 2013, we can see that net cash flow is very similar (\u00a311m vs. \u00a33m), but there is a big difference in approach. Celtic have made much more from operations and player sales, which Rangers early matched via \u00a370m loans and \u00a334m share capital.\"Image\"<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n
#CelticFC<\/a>\u00a0are in good shape financially, despite the pandemic, thanks to their sustainable model, though their fans might prefer more investment in the squad. The club will hope that the arrival of a new manager and expenditure on summer signings will deliver better results.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n

\u2022 \u2022 \u2022<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0We are in good shape, but there appears to be a glass ceiling, a reluctance to leave our comfort zone, combined with a fear of losing another Ibrox based club.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0When our business strategy is based on the performance of a rival, and a rival that has been consistently losing vast sums of money since it’s inception, then surely it’s time for change ?\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0The present set up, where the old firm brand is crucial to our financial structuring , isn’t going to last.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0They’re going to fold, and the game will have to adapt.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0Celtic , the board that is, need to be proactive and start to move away from that model.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0They had the chance back in 2012, but chose to foster the new club and that is a form of negligence.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u00a0With the writing on the wall for a second Ibrox club, Celtic need to show ambition beyond the city, and the rest of Scottish football needs to wake up and move with them.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n