The club published a series of answers to questions asked frequently by members alongside its annual report on Wednesday. It included a series of revelations and admissions, including:
“Our budget and cost control has not been good enough,” Glenn Douglas, who resigned from his role as chair of Sussex’s finance, audit and risk committee and the board last week, wrote in the club’s annual report, adding that the “unsustainable position” would present cashflow challenges and threaten Sussex’s “ability to fund what we want to achieve”.
Douglas cited failures to increase commercial, retail and ticketing income along with “significant unavoidable cost increases”, which included increases in national insurance contributions, a rise in the minimum wage and utility cost inflation. He also cited the additional cost of running a semi-professional women’s team in the new county structure.
The operating loss of £1.33 million was masked to some extent at consolidated group level, owing primarily to a one-off payment of £413,000 from the ECB linked to the sale of stakes in the eight Hundred franchises, though Sussex added that an anticipated interest payment of around £100,000 – which had been built into budgets – did not materialise before the end of the financial year.
“There was an over-reliance on anticipated Hundred-related income acting as a financial safety net,” Sussex told members. “That assumption did not materialise as expected.”
The club said that, with hindsight, their budgets for 2024-25 had been “too optimistic” given that losses in the previous year had been masked by unsustainable income sources, including a £150,000 “legacy payment” and income of around £100,000 linked to Sussex’s home Blast quarter-final against Lancashire.
“In 2024-25, the cost base increased as part of a growth strategy, but income did not meet budgeted expectations, and corrective action was not taken early enough to prevent the deficit widening materially,” the club said.
“Forecasts during the year were overly optimistic, with a belief that expected income and mitigations would stabilise the position. As those assumptions proved incorrect, the scale of the deterioration became clearer later in the year.”
Sussex also declined to pin the blame exclusively on Peter Fitzboydon, who stepped down as chief executive last year for undisclosed “personal reasons” before the scale of the club’s financial worries had become public record.
“While executive leadership decisions were a contributing factor to the financial outcome, the level of scrutiny, challenge and escalation applied across the organisation was not sufficient for the level of financial risk being carried,” the club said.
Paul Farbrace has even offered to resign from his position as head coach if required. “I am one of the best paid employees at the club,” he told the Telegraph this month. “You could have a slightly less experienced coach who wouldn’t be on such a big salary… I don’t want to leave… but I would sacrifice myself to keep the group together.”
The group of former players and sponsors reiterated their calls for the remainder of the club’s board to resign in full on Wednesday, saying that the financial statements “represent a systemic failure of governance and oversight”. They added in their latest open letter: “Sussex Cricket’s future depends on decisive action and the restoration of financial and governance discipline”.
Sussex have also announced that the club’s annual general meeting will take on March 24, with formal proceedings followed by an opportunity for Farbrace, interim chief executive Mark West and board members to answer questions from members.
Matt Roller is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo. @mroller98
