March 24, 2018, 10:21:32 AM

Author Topic: Should we sack Steve Walsh?  (Read 35913 times)

Offline Ridge

  • Howard Kendall
  • *****
  • Posts: 11601
  • Karma: 2877
Re: Should we sack Steve Walsh?
« on: February 08, 2018, 05:15:54 PM »
Thank you, but sponsorship & advertising =/= commercial performance. And that was the year we signed our new shirt sponsors and introduced a sleeve sponsor, so you would expect a big jump in spon. Would be interested to see other clubs % growth for each new sponsor.

For commercial to have grown 66% last year would represent a stunning turnaround, as since 2013 commercial has grown by just 8m (as of 2016 accounts), and by those accounts profit from commercial had dropped between 15-16.

In fact, if you look at our EBITDA for that account period, the only clubs worse than Everton at proftiable revenue generation are Swansea, Sunderland, Stoke, and Villa.

You're only likely to get a major increase when you sign new deals, deals are never going to increase like that over duration of agreement. I wouldn't expect many clubs to post increases of that size, Leicester maybe? But you normally expect improved financial results to follow improved on pitch performances, in part because commercial agreements reward based on performance.

SportPesa is included and shows the increase of about double on previous year and supposedly will show 3 fold increase on Chang deal in due course. Was about 10m, puts us about 7th/8th overall on main sponsor, behind who you'd expect. It tends to make up around 20%-40% of commercial revenue, so key element to get right. It's not the best deal, but it's not the worst and it's a big improvement.

Sleeve sponsor is earning United about 10m, average in PL is probably closer to 1m and probably accounts for something like 5% increase in most cases, only started this season didn't it? not sure that would be included or for full year. In the scheme of things Angry Birds is a sponsor I quite like the profile of. Innovative, engages young fans, digital content, global reach. I can't help but feel we might have got more content, potential, if things hadn't been so shit on the field.

Would assume USM deal for training ground is also included, but again not sure how many months. That is worth a similar amount over a year as the increase in value of the shirt sponsor, supposedly about 5m. Obviously that's tied to board connections, but that's not something a CEO can control.

It's not the entire commercial profit, but then Goodison has limitations with regard to corporate facilities and commercial space. Essentially there is very little room to increase profitability without increasing prices or flogging us more tat or treating us more as consumers.

There's only so much work you can do on marketing and actually I think the comedy decisions are not in our commercial operation anymore. Elstone can't control managerial appointments, DoF, transfers or performances on the field. But off the field the poor choices are in boardroom Elstone is a part of. But he's not calling the shots, he's dealing with the fallout and poor decisions, his job could be much easier if we had a manager who managed the club with pride and ambition, which company would want to be associated with us this season?

Thank-o-Matic 3.0 By Adk Team