Wigan post net profits of £4.3million

Wigan Athletic release financial results for the year ended 31 May 2017.

Wigan Athletic report net profit of £4.3 million for the year ended 31 May 2017.
Net profit reported for first time since 2014.
Chief executive, Jonathan Jackson: “The club remains committed to achieving success.”
Wigan Athletic Football Club release their financial results for the year ended 31 May 2017 which show a net profit of £4.3 million compared to a net loss of £2.3 million in 2016.

The figures cover the season 2016-17 when Latics were relegated to League One.

Turnover increased by over £9 million to reach £25 million mainly due to increased parachute payments from the Premier League which totalled £17.7 million in the year. 2016/17 was the final season that the club will receive parachute payments as a result of relegation from the top tier in 2013. EFL central payments and match related revenues increased as a result of the club competing in the EFL Championship and a lucrative FA Cup tie away at Manchester United also contributed to the increase in turnover.

The net profit was achieved primarily due to the sale of Yanic Wildschut to Norwich City in January 2017 and, in total, the club made a profit of £4.6 million on the sale of players during the year.

The club invested almost £3 million in new players with the intention of improving the playing squad and creating another promotion challenge after the success of winning the League One title in 2016. Unfortunately, this did not materialise. Three managers took charge of the first team during the season, and the club was relegated to League One in a disappointing season.

Total expenses including salary costs and amortisation of player contracts increased to £25.7 million from £20 million in the previous year. Player salaries were again the most significant expenditure and total salary costs increased to £16.6 million compared to £11.9 million in the previous year.

Chief Executive Jonathan Jackson commented: "The 2016/17 season was the final year that the club received the financial benefits from being a Premier League club. During the four years since relegation, the club has worked hard to return but without success. The unpredictability of football requires us to take a prudent view of our longer-term strategy for the club, which includes a continual review of player and other operating costs to create future sustainability and build for success.

“Despite posting a £4.3 million profit, relegation to League One was a huge disappointment for everyone after the success of the previous season. Many Championship clubs sustained huge financial losses in their pursuit of promotion to the Premier League and it is an extremely difficult environment to achieve success without significant owner investment. The continued financial support of the Whelan family has helped the club to compete at the top levels for many years. The challenge is to ensure that the club have the financial foundation to achieve results on the pitch and replicate that success in the future”

“The club remains committed to achieving success. The core of the squad from last season has been improved with new players and a new management team. The team are currently enjoying an excellent season so far and are in a strong position to achieve our first objective — promotion back to the Championship.”

https://www.wiganathletic.com/news/2018/january/club-statement-on-2017-financial-accounts/

It'll be very different for them in the next financial year's results they post without any more parachute payments. Suspect it'll be massive losses.

If you follow League 1 you have to be impressed by Wigan's efforts this year and it looks odds on that they - and possibly Rovers - will be back in the Championship next season. I don't like Wigan but I do get the impression they have a better run club than we do.

They have been far better than us at negotiating player sales over the last 10 years.They got as much money for Wilson Palacios for example as we got for Cahill, Alonso,Mooy, Holding and Clough combined. If Dave Whelan had 3 players good enough for Arsenal and Chelsea as we did im sure he would have negotiated far better deals than we did.
Even in the last 18 months they got £7 million off second tier side Norwich for Wildschut while we only got under half that for an England under 21 who Arsenal considered to be up to their standard

Growler wrote:They have been far better than us at negotiating player sales over the last 10 years.They got as much money for Wilson Palacios for example as we got for Cahill, Alonso,Mooy, Holding and Clough combined. If Dave Whelan had 3 players good enough for Arsenal and Chelsea as we did im sure he would have negotiated far better deals than we did.
Even in the last 18 months they got £7 million off second tier side Norwich for Wildschut while we only got under half that for an England under 21 who Arsenal considered to be up to their standard

We've given our talent away and it's heartbreaking.

wanderlust wrote:

Growler wrote:They have been far better than us at negotiating player sales over the last 10 years.They got as much money for Wilson Palacios for example as we got for Cahill, Alonso,Mooy, Holding and Clough combined. If Dave Whelan had 3 players good enough for Arsenal and Chelsea as we did im sure he would have negotiated far better deals than we did.
Even in the last 18 months they got £7 million off second tier side Norwich for Wildschut while we only got under half that for an England under 21 who Arsenal considered to be up to their standard

We've given our talent away and it's heartbreaking.

Alonso and Mooy turned down new contracts with us and left when their current ones left - so there was not much we could do about that.

Cahill had 6 months left on his contract and wasn't going to resign with us, so we got what we could rather than let him go for nothing half a season later.

Holding and Clough were sold because we needed the money - we had Holdsworth's Blumarble loan hanging over our head and the taxman needed paying.  We didn't have any other choice other than to sell for cash down there and then.

Maybe if Gartside had managed the club's finances better and sacked Coyle sooner we may not have seen most of these players go but we are were we are and we just have to get on with it.

As we had no sporting director, I’d put the majority of the blame for the above at Gartside’s door. Directors are ultimately responsible for contracts in my opinion, letting Cahill, Ben Haim or Elmander (a few off the top of my head) reach a point where we lost them for a minimal fee, when they were saleable assets was criminal.

Sluffy wrote:Maybe if Gartside had managed the club's finances better and sacked Coyle sooner

wanderlust wrote:We've given our talent away and it's heartbreaking.

It isn't. Get a life.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:We've given our talent away and it's heartbreaking.

It isn't. Get a life.

You may be comfortable with giving it away all the time, but I guess beggars can't be choosers.

My heart doesn't break when a player leaves the club.

Natasha Whittam wrote:My heart doesn't break when a player leaves the club.

Hardly surprising seeing as you've never liked any of them.

wanderlust wrote:Hardly surprising seeing as you've never liked any of them.

If you were genuinely heartbroken when Holding, Cahill etc left the club I encourage you to seek therapy. I was more upset when my local Spar increased the price of Pepsi.