Skip to main content

Bentley - Forbes Consulting Rankings

The prestigious Bentley Forbes Consulting rankings for 2017 - 2018 are out.  The rankings present a snap shot of the financial stability and sustainability of 16 of the 18 first class counties.  The rankings for 2016 - 2017 and some comments on methodology are here.

So without further ado: the rankings: {Please imagine a drum roll at this point}



CountyProfitAssetsRankingPositionMove
Surrey163.51Level
Glamorgan5342Up 11
Somerset274.53Level
Essex8254Down 3
Leicestershire7565Up 1
Nottinghamshire4865Down 2
Sussex1417.57Level
Worcestershire31388Up 2
Northamptonshire1348.59Up 3
Gloucestershire612910Up 1
Kent1099.511Down 2
Derbyshire9109.511Down 4
Durham11111113Up 1
Yorkshire12161414Up 1
Warwickshire16141515Up 1
Lancashire15151516Up 1

A few points to note. The counties reviewed have declined from 17 to 16, compared to 18 first class counties. As in the 2016 / 2017 rankings Hampshire are excluded as the county cricket operation is a 100% subsidiary of a company owned by Rod Bransgrove and disentangling the cricket entity from the business operations looks as if it would be complicated. Additionally Middlesex has not filed any accounts with the Financial Conduct Authority (The regulator for mutual companies) since the last rankings were prepared. The most recent set of  available accounts for Middlesex are for 2015. Rather than plugging outdated data into the rankings I've left them out for the moment, but will, hopefully, update when accounts are filed. Some counties (Yorkshire for instance) have been busy and filed two sets of accounts since the last table.  I've used the most recent set of figures.


As in previous years I have tried to standardise profits by averaging across four years and excluding the one off £2.5m paid to Glamorgan and £2.0m Durham by the ECB and Glamorgan's profit from redeeming debt at less than face value. 

There have been a couple of interesting developments in this years figures.  Firstly Northants have a new corporate structure.  A group of members have contributed cash of £1m+ to set up a holding company which owns the county cricket club, which itself has changed from a mutual to a company limited by guarantee.  I have treated the £925k lent interest free from the holding company to the "county" as if were not debt at all.  That is I'm assuming the loan won't be repaid and is doing the job of share capital.  Secondly Durham have been the subject of high profile bail out by the ECB.  As a part of the resolution Durham County Council converted a £3.7m loan into preference shares.  The preference shares don't pay any dividends but are repayable within 10 years. As I assume Durham will have to pay the council at some point I have included the preference shares as debt.

In terms of significant movements Glamorgan are obviously the star performers which is explained here.  Although the ups and downs are quite fun it is against a back drop where most counties are getting better off and I'll do an additional state of the game post as and when I get the time.  The bottom three, all metropolitan counties with big grounds, are becoming marooned from the group above.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mo Bobat and County Cricket

Cricinfo has this interview with ECB "Performance Director" Mo Bobat.  Bobat makes an interesting claim about county cricket, "Take something like county batting average. We know that a county batting average does not significantly predict an international batting average, so a lot of the conventional things that are looked at as being indicators of success - they don't really stand true in a predictive sense."  And later in the article there is a graph, showing county averages plotted against test averages for 13 English test batsmen.  This is reproduced below.

better than random? raw data suggests no meaningful link between championship and test averages
2025303540455055602324252627

County Championship Salary Cap

This is post about salaries in county cricket.

The first class counties are subject to a cap and a collar on amounts paid in wages to cricketers.  They must pay above a collar, currently £0.75m, and below a cap, currently £2m. There is an agreement for both the collar and the cap to increase over the next funding round to 2024. In 2024 the collar will be £1.5m and the cap £2.5m
What is less clear is what payments count towards the cap and collar.  I assume employers' national insurance (a 13% tax on wages) isn't included.  Similarly I assume payments to coaching staff don't count towards the cap as if they did, Somerset, Lancashire and Yorkshire would all be over the current £2m cap. 
I've gone through the accounts of the first class counties to see what, if any, disclosure, they include on players' wages.  What gets disclosed varies enormously, quite a lot for some counties, nothing for others.  Additionally there is a possibility the information included in the tabl…

English County Cricket Finance: 2018 Bentley Forbes Rankings

I have gone through the most recent financial statements for the English first class counties,  made an estimate of the financial strength of each and given them a Bentley Forbes Consulting (TM) financial sustainability ranking.  The overall table looks like this.



County      ProfitAssetsRankingPositionEssex  4  4  4  1Surrey  1  7  4  1Nottinghamshire  5  5  5  3Somerset  2  8  5  3Derbyshire  8  3  5  5Leicestshire   6  6 6  6Sussex 15  1 8  7Middlesex 14  2 8  7Kent    9  9 9  9Worcestshire   3 15 910Gloucestshire  7 12 9.511Northamptonshire  11 13 1212Glamorgan  16 10 1313Durham    12 14 1313Yorkshire   10 17 1315Warwickshire  17 11 1416Lancashire  13 16 1417       
The approach is to rank the counties for profitability and balance sheet strength and combine the two measures in a sustainability ranking. The balance sheet strength is itself a combination of three separate measures (for you cricketing accountants there's a bit more on how I did this below.) 
A few big picture po…