The mancityfans.net football forum

I seem to remember that our next financial results are due in September. Of course the media vultures will have a field day on the wage bill, but what is more interesting for the long term is what the latest revenue increase is. The year before was 44%, and Im hoping for something similar, in the figures before the CL and the Etihad Campus deal kick in. Anyone know when the figures are due?

The 2009/2010 results were published in Feb this year. So nothing due until next year.

john@staustell wrote:I seem to remember that our next financial results are due in September. Of course the media vultures will have a field day on the wage bill, but what is more interesting for the long term is what the latest revenue increase is. The year before was 44%, and Im hoping for something similar, in the figures before the CL and the Etihad Campus deal kick in. Anyone know when the figures are due?

Does that mean the 400 mill cannot be accouted for yet.
If anybody know can we argue the fact that Uefa have let us play in Europe wearing Ethihad shrts thus accepting them as our sponsers so they must accept they have dine it with the stadium

I think people are misconstruing what will happen if the sponsorship deal breaches their fair market value rules.

We still get to keep the sponsor, we still get to keep the money.

But when they consider our application to the Champion's League next year, they won't take into account the actual pound value of the deal, rather they would only use a portion to the limit of what they consider fair market value. However, being that the filth are getting £10M/year from their training kit sponsor and Barca are finishing up what will be(I think) a £40M/year deal for their shirt sponsor, I think £400m/10 years is safe.

And even if we were to go out and buy Messi and Ronaldo next summer, it's extremely unlikely the UEFA punishment would be exclusion from the Champion's League.

Slim wrote:I think people are misconstruing what will happen if the sponsorship deal breaches their fair market value rules.

We still get to keep the sponsor, we still get to keep the money.

But when they consider our application to the Champion's League next year, they won't take into account the actual pound value of the deal, rather they would only use a portion to the limit of what they consider fair market value. However, being that the filth are getting £10M/year from their training kit sponsor and Barca are finishing up what will be(I think) a £40M/year deal for their shirt sponsor, I think £400m/10 years is safe.

And even if we were to go out and buy Messi and Ronaldo next summer, it's extremely unlikely the UEFA punishment would be exclusion from the Champion's League.

And seeing they cant even deal with FC Sion for fielding 5 illegal players blatantly, or something!

Aren't we in a 'monitoring period' or something? So it wouldn't have any effect on anyone yet, would it? 2014?

I reckon this months figures will still see the wages increasing, but after that the wages will be reducing and the revenues increasing. So Platini can go and do one.

Shirt sponsorship will be £20m a year at market value, which accounts for £200m as it's a 10 year deal.

The Mail and the Telegraph both quote U****d and Liverpool as having £20m a year on their sponsorship deals, so that isn't a problem they are from last year.

In 2004 Arsenal sold the naming rights to Emirates for £6.6m a year (£100m over 15 years). Take into account our stature is now above Arsenal (finished higher in league, won a trophy more recently) and inflation, how much sponsorship prices have increased over the last 7 years. The Mail article says Premiership shirt sponsorship was up by £40m in one year, and average of £2m a club (bigger clubs will see more and smaller clubs less but lets use the average for market value). So based on that trend, wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest £10/12m a year for stadium naming rights. (based on a 2m a year inflation that could be £14m rise over the Emirates deal putting it at £20m a year).

Based on £12m a year not being an unreasonable figure. That's £320m of the £400m deal accounted for at fair market prices.

So then looking at £8m a year on the other corporate and business partnerships, including the use of the land and the stuff we don't know about / understand. That £8m a year wouldn't be difficult to account for.

Gary Cook was immense in the way he's done this deal

Sources:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/6193079/Liverpool-lead-shirt-sponsor-deal-alongside-rivals-Manchester-United.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1324565/Manchester-United-Liverpool-Tottenham-shirt-sponsorship-puts-England-Europe.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/3715678.stm

frozen_pea wrote:Shirt sponsorship will be £20m a year at market value, which accounts for £200m as it's a 10 year deal.

The Mail and the Telegraph both quote U****d and Liverpool as having £20m a year on their sponsorship deals, so that isn't a problem they are from last year.

In 2004 Arsenal sold the naming rights to Emirates for £6.6m a year (£100m over 15 years). Take into account our stature is now above Arsenal (finished higher in league, won a trophy more recently) and inflation, how much sponsorship prices have increased over the last 7 years. The Mail article says Premiership shirt sponsorship was up by £40m in one year, and average of £2m a club (bigger clubs will see more and smaller clubs less but lets use the average for market value). So based on that trend, wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest £10/12m a year for stadium naming rights. (based on a 2m a year inflation that could be £14m rise over the Emirates deal putting it at £20m a year).

Based on £12m a year not being an unreasonable figure. That's £320m of the £400m deal accounted for at fair market prices.

So then looking at £8m a year on the other corporate and business partnerships, including the use of the land and the stuff we don't know about / understand. That £8m a year wouldn't be difficult to account for.

Gary Cook was immense in the way he's done this deal

Sources:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/6193079/Liverpool-lead-shirt-sponsor-deal-alongside-rivals-Manchester-United.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1324565/Manchester-United-Liverpool-Tottenham-shirt-sponsorship-puts-England-Europe.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/3715678.stm

I don't think getting our club to copy what other clubs have done make Mr.Cook immense..We may have slightly improved what the others have done but he was employed to do such things.That was his field.

Rag_hater wrote:I don't think getting our club to copy what other clubs have done make Mr.Cook immense..We may have slightly improved what the others have done but he was employed to do such things.That was his field.

The deal isn't copying other clubs, it's a ground breaking deal with the partnership. No other club has anything like this, I'm just breaking it down and showing how easy we can compare to current prices and market value.

We don't know the details of the payment structure, how much we get up front, how much we get per year. I have a feeling it will be enough to cover this years FFP, taking us under to the maximum loss allowed.