Celtic and the rest of the SPL spending.

ourdaywillcome! · Jan 31, 2012

The perceived wisdom around Scotland is that clubs in the SPL don’t pay transfer fees anymore.

The severe financial cutbacks that were forced on our game by the collapse of the Setanta deal, coupled with falling crowds are key reasons given for the lack of spending power within Scotland.

What the following table shows is that is certainly not the case. While we’re unlikely to have a transfer deadline day bonanza in the way that certain other leagues may, there are still financial movements being made to acquire and release players.

The following table shows the transfer spend of each of the current SPL clubs. We’ll get a couple of caveats out of the way first of all. The data we have here is the best available, but in some cases it’s not gospel.

In the cases of Aberdeen, Celtic and Rangers all of the figures used were taken directly from their annual reports with the exception of Rangers in 2010/11, which has yet to be released. This info is straight from the horse’s mouth and is accurate to the nearest £1000.

For the clubs that don’t publicly release their books we’ve used a number of trusted sources and the reports from transfers at the time. These figures may not be quite as close to the dead-on figure that we have for the three clubs mentioned previously, but they’re pretty * close.

In some cases there is a £0 transfer outlay for the season, which means there were no reports or suggestions that any transfer money changed hands in that particular year. Again, that is not absolutely gospel; it is based on the players signed, their ages, whether they were previously under contract and any other indicators that a fee was paid.

Secondly we need to define what counts as a transfer fee here. In the case of annual reports a transfer fee is known either as a “payment to acquire/receipt from sale of player’s registration” or a “payment to acquire/receipt from sale of an intangible asset”. Very basically speaking, this is accountant speak for a transfer fee. What counts as a transfer fee? Money received for a player or manager to move clubs. It may also include fees paid for loaning a player.

It’s also worth noting that some of these figures don’t tally exactly with transfer fees reported at the time. That is because annual reports for each year only count the money that has already been received, and don’t include instalments due in the future or bonus performance payments, which will only be recorded when they’re received.

For example, Carlos Cuellar moved to Aston Villa for a reported £7.7m, but Rangers’ incomings for that year were £7.6m and that also included the sale of Daniel Cousin and Jean-Claude Darcheville. That would suggest that at least part of the Cuellar fee was made up of instalments and/or bonuses to be paid at a later date.

Clear enough? Now, here’s the science part…

[/URL]

The first revelation is that every club in the division has paid a transfer fee over the last five seasons. These may not be the exorbitant fees that are seen in the English Premiership, but business is being done. Celtic have the highest outlay, with a spend of just over £35 million, closely followed by Rangers who have spent around £33 million in the same period.

As expected, there is a significant drop off in money out after the Old Firm clubs. Hearts have spent almost £3 million in that time, with over half of that spent on the arrivals of Mauricio Pinilla, Christos Karipidis, Laryea Kingston and Christian Nade.

Hibernian have spent around £1.4 million acquiring the likes of Anthony Stokes, Derek Riordan, John Rankin and Torben Joneleit, while Dundee United have spent just short of seven figures, the largest chunk of that being on Jon Daly. Almost two thirds of Aberdeen’s transfer spending was on Tommy Wright, Charlie Mulgrew, Sone Aluko and bringing Mark McGhee back to Pittodrie.

A third of Motherwell’s spend was in bringing back Steven Hammell from Southend. Inverness, St Johnstone and Kilmarnock have spent small amounts taking in the likes of Dougie Imrie, Liam Craig and Connor Sammon. Dunfermline and St Mirren paid out small fees for the likes of Kevin Rutkiewicz and Eddie Malone.

But who are the teams that are making money from selling their players?

[/URL]

Again we see Celtic leading the way in terms of pure numbers, with big transfer fees received in particular for Aidan McGeady and Stilian Petrov. Rangers have made sales of just over £20 million, with the departure of Carlos Cuellar a large part of that.

Here is where Hibernian really punch above their weight. The Easter Road side have sold just over £16 million of players in five years, including very large fees for Steven Fletcher, Scott Brown and Steven Whittaker.

Hearts have also sold well, and while they have not received all of the £9 million for Craig Gordon, the sale of the Sunderland goalkeeper, Roman Bednar and Andrius Velicka made a huge amount in 07/08. Kilmarnock also owe their healthy sale figure to one deal in particular; Steven Naismith moving to Rangers.

Motherwell and Dundee United have sold well, getting good fees for David Clarkson, Paul Quinn and Barry Robson. Aberdeen have also fared fairly well, particularly with the sales of Lee Miller and Russell Anderson.

Inverness and St Mirren have returned modest amounts, while almost all of St Johnstone’s transfer incomings have come from the “sale” of Owen Coyle to Burnley. Dunfermline’s sale of Willie Gibson to Crawley accounts for the vast majority of their dealings.

So, who has been turning a profit?

[/URL]

Again we see Hibernian as big winners, because their business model is so focused on bringing through youth players and moving them on for healthy fees. Hearts too have done well with the wheeling and dealing of player sales.

Almost every club in the division has turned a modest profit, although that may well be by necessity rather than by design, as financial threats and the lure of bigger money south of the border take hold. The fact that so few clubs make operating profit, even after positive balances in the transfer market, suggests that is still the case.

Celtic’s transfer balance is interesting, given the figures involved, as they seem to spend exactly what they make, reinvesting the money taken from sales into the playing squad. The club transfer policy seems to be to find players with a sell-on value, put them in the metaphorical shop window, sell them on at a profit and then repeat the process with the proceeds.

Only two clubs make a loss in their dealings. St Johnstone look to have made a modest loss of around £40,000 because they haven’t managed to move on many of their current crop. With interest in players like Murray Davidson or next year’s inclusion of any compensation for the loss of Derek McInnes that may well change overnight.

Rangers also have a significant deficit, particularly down the lack of player sales. Again, this may change suddenly if the likes of Nikica Jelavic are moved on for a good fee, and there will be some positives from next year’s report with the sell-on fee for Charlie Adam. However, significant fees were paid on players such as Filip Sebo, Jeremy Clement, Kyle Lafferty and Jelavic himself.

The only significant sales were of Carlos Cuellar, Danny Wilson and Alan Hutton, with the likes of Sebo, Clement, Svensson, and Kevin Thomson moved on for a loss. There are signs of this attitude changing, with Ally McCoist somewhat forced into less glamorous markets in search of young, marketable talent.

And that is what every Scottish manager is after.
Click to expand...

Not really happy with our profit tbh, at least we are breaking even. Our profits will sky rocket though when players like Izzy, Kayal, Wanyama, Hooper etc are all sold for big money.

Unreal from Hibs, great business model. Same can't be said for the scum though. Minus £13million quid.

Lecs · Jan 31, 2012

Interesting!

While Hibernian's financial state is great, their team is *! So I'm happy just breaking even and being top of the league

Liam Scales · Jan 31, 2012

That is very interesting, minus McGeady money we would have the same sort of outlay as the Huns.

ILoveTheCeltic · Jan 31, 2012

Huns think they got £9million for Hutton and £8million for Cuellar when they only got £6.2million for Cuellar and £7million for Hutton and they even gave Hutton £1million of that to leave if im right.

Rude Bhoy · Jan 31, 2012

LOL @ the Huns -13M

Dazza · Jan 31, 2012

devlin1888 said: ↑

That is very interesting, minus McGeady money we would have the same sort of outlay as the Huns.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true, because if we didn't sell him then I doubt we would have spent so much, or at least we would have sold someone else.

champions100% · Jan 31, 2012

devlin1888 said: ↑

That is very interesting, minus McGeady money we would have the same sort of outlay as the Huns.
Click to expand...

I don't think that would be the case, instead it would have meant that less spending would have happened. Although we might get annoyed at the fact that we're not speanding big bucks on a decent CB and CF at times, i do think this board is very sensible in its approach to bussiness.

Plus, got to remember there has been a lot of ins and outs over the last 3 years alone, with Mowbray bringing in all his players then Lenny needing to change that because majority weren't good enough, so it could be argued if that hadn't have happened then we would be financially in an even better position.

Looks like good new though! Very happy at this moment in time both finanically and with the football

Hail Hail

Liam Scales · Jan 31, 2012

I know what you guys mean, just thought it was interesting to highlight. Aiden McGeady funded the purchase of this full team.

PaddyMagic · Jan 31, 2012

Interesting facts also shows scottish football has potential and that we might see a better league in the future.

What stand out is hibs though they have made huge profits and still play really *.

Jenksy · Jan 31, 2012

It shows that Lawwell is true to his word and any profits go back in to the squad, can't believe some of the stick he gets from fans who want us to spend money we don't have.

Jenksy · Jan 31, 2012

PaddyMagic said: ↑

What stand out is hibs though they have made huge profits and still play really *.
Click to expand...

I know you have to wonder where that money has went, they built that new stand but have not filled even half the stadium all season!

ourdaywillcome! · Jan 31, 2012

Jenksy said: ↑

It shows that Lawwell is true to his word and any profits go back in to the squad, can't believe some of the stick he gets from fans who want us to spend money we don't have.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Markybhoy · Jan 31, 2012

Jenksy said: ↑

I know you have to wonder where that money has went, they built that new stand but have not filled even half the stadium all season!
Click to expand...

Hibernian have built their own training facilities and a new stand at Easter Road. That's where the money has gone.

If Hibernian bring through some more good youth players in the next few years, and sell them on for the same sort of money, then they will be in a really great position. They'll have an all seater stadium, their own training facilities, no debt and cash in the bank to invest into their playing squad.

Celtic and the rest of the SPL spending.

ourdaywillcome! Gold Member Gold Member

Lecs

Liam Scales

ILoveTheCeltic

Rude Bhoy

Dazza

champions100%

Liam Scales

PaddyMagic

Jenksy

Jenksy

ourdaywillcome! Gold Member Gold Member

Markybhoy