Prem League Finances

[kinkylola]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013 ... ub-by-club

Apologies if posted elsewhere, but I caught this online and thought i'd pass it on. Really interesting to me is that our commercial income is 121m, higher than united, chelsea and arsenal, but our matchday income is only 22m (united 99m, Arsenal 95, Chelsea 75m). THat's great return for the money for fans, but not good for the club. We're 5th overall in matchday, but the gap is huge. Just above us at 24m is Newcastle, but from them to Liverpool, the next highest, it is double.

We are in a group of newcastle, tottenham, aston villa and everton, the rest are all below 11m.

What these numbers mean to me is that we will have to up ticket prices and cut the wage bill in order to compete financially in the long term with Chelsea, United and Arsenal (ha!) .... if FFP works to hamstring us as I am afraid it will. (this is not a post about FFP, i'm not nearly knowledgeable enough).

Seems like we have invested a fair bit into youth ... but do we really have the talent coming through to be able to have an affect on these numbers in the next 5 years? I don't know. Then the only way to go is to adopt the "old united model" of one big signing per year while evening out wages. The only problem is ... they had an exceptional group of youth players come through at exactly the right time which kickstarted that whole movement and allowed them to dominate while improving finances. I hope that we could get the same, but it doesn't look like we have that type of crop yet.

[Im_Spartacus]

Perhaps the answer to the next stage of the FFP problem is right un front of our eyes.


Build 27000 new executive seats, where a season ticket is £3000 a time, all bought by the sheikh's friends who just happen to not be able to make it each week, so donate their ticket back to the club to be sold to ordinary fans on a game by game basis.

Thats the shortfall made up.

[sidSmith]

Perhaps the answer to the next stage of the FFP problem is right un front of our eyes.

Build 27000 new executive seats, where a season ticket is £3000 a time, all bought by the sheikh's friends who just happen to not be able to make it each week, so donate their ticket back to the club to be sold to ordinary fans on a game by game basis.

Thats the shortfall made up.

I'm sure I read somewhere that they'd closed these loopholes to stop such a thing. A seat has to be sold at market rate, or whatever the equivalent might be.

[Scatman]

Perhaps the answer to the next stage of the FFP problem is right un front of our eyes.


Build 27000 new executive seats, where a season ticket is £3000 a time, all bought by the sheikh's friends who just happen to not be able to make it each week, so donate their ticket back to the club to be sold to ordinary fans on a game by game basis.

Thats the shortfall made up.

I'd want my seat to be heated if they were to do that

[Dronny]

Perhaps the answer to the next stage of the FFP problem is right un front of our eyes.

Build 27000 new executive seats, where a season ticket is £3000 a time, all bought by the sheikh's friends who just happen to not be able to make it each week, so donate their ticket back to the club to be sold to ordinary fans on a game by game basis.

Thats the shortfall made up.

I'm sure I read somewhere that they'd closed these loopholes to stop such a thing. A seat has to be sold at market rate, or whatever the equivalent might be.

Which topic stated that the scum along with the Arse and no doubt a few others always quote 'seats sold' rather than actual bodies through the door. Therefore to expand on Sparty's comment stick a further 20,000 seats in to COMS and let 'people' buy them to remain empty or flogged to other fans at a matchday rate?

[BlueinBosnia]

...our matchday income is only 22m (united 99m, Arsenal 95, Chelsea 75m). THat's great return for the money for fans, but not good for the club. We're 5th overall in matchday, but the gap is huge. Just above us at 24m is Newcastle, but from them to Liverpool, the next highest, it is double.

We are in a group of newcastle, tottenham, aston villa and everton, the rest are all below 11m.

These figures are for 2011-12, when we were playing Europa League football, with a half-full stadium at reduced prices. That'll explain a significant portion of the discrepancy for matchday income (alongside stadium size and ticket prices overall).

[BlueinBosnia]

Which topic stated that the scum along with the Arse and no doubt a few others always quote 'seats sold' rather than actual bodies through the door. Therefore to expand on Sparty's comment stick a further 20,000 seats in to COMS and let 'people' buy them to remain empty or flogged to other fans at a matchday rate?

We also quote 'seats sold' as our attendance as things already stand.

However, we have a far, far smaller proportion of our ST holders who own the tickets as a for-profit enterprise, meaning that they attend all games, and don't just sell the tickets to bigger matches and those during holiday periods, etc. at hugely inflated prices. Also, we do not force our ST holders to compulsorily purchase cup tickets, etc. Therefore the discrepancy between our 'seats sold' and 'bums on seats' figures won't be so great as the Rags (probably a couple of thousand, tops).

[john@staustell]

What struck me about that Guardian article is that our matchday income was around £20M, but Liverpool around 40. How does this happen? Is it something to do with them winning 2 cups that season?

Or do they just charge more?

[kinkylola]

...our matchday income is only 22m (united 99m, Arsenal 95, Chelsea 75m). THat's great return for the money for fans, but not good for the club. We're 5th overall in matchday, but the gap is huge. Just above us at 24m is Newcastle, but from them to Liverpool, the next highest, it is double.

We are in a group of newcastle, tottenham, aston villa and everton, the rest are all below 11m.

These figures are for 2011-12, when we were playing Europa League football, with a half-full stadium at reduced prices. That'll explain a significant portion of the discrepancy for matchday income (alongside stadium size and ticket prices overall).

Yes they're for 11-12 when we ended up in the Europa league after being dumped out of the chumps league ... probably higher overall income than this year when we were dumped out of the chumps league and didn't even make the europa. The accounts are through May 31st 2012 so it is the latest numbers we can evaluate.

[kinkylola]

What struck me about that Guardian article is that our matchday income was around £20M, but Liverpool around 40. How does this happen? Is it something to do with them winning 2 cups that season?

Or do they just charge more?

could be a mixture of charging more and money from cup wins? I'm not sure what actually counts as match day income ... merchandising sales at the stadium on macthday? Concessions? Maybe they're selling a lot of pies.

[BlueinBosnia]

...our matchday income is only 22m (united 99m, Arsenal 95, Chelsea 75m). THat's great return for the money for fans, but not good for the club. We're 5th overall in matchday, but the gap is huge. Just above us at 24m is Newcastle, but from them to Liverpool, the next highest, it is double.

We are in a group of newcastle, tottenham, aston villa and everton, the rest are all below 11m.

These figures are for 2011-12, when we were playing Europa League football, with a half-full stadium at reduced prices. That'll explain a significant portion of the discrepancy for matchday income (alongside stadium size and ticket prices overall).

Yes they're for 11-12 when we ended up in the Europa league after being dumped out of the chumps league ... probably higher overall income than this year when we were dumped out of the chumps league and didn't even make the europa. The accounts are through May 31st 2012 so it is the latest numbers we can evaluate.

Sorry, error from me: I thought 11-12 was 2 seasons ago (i.e. 10-11)!

[CTID Hants]

Just stumbled across this from Deloittes, below is their section on us but the stats for the other clubs can be found in this link.......

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Uni ... e-2013.pdf

Deloitte Football Money League 2013

We are ranked 7th in Europe

Revenue for 2011/12 season

Match day (£30.8m)
Broadcasting (£88.2m)
Commercial (£112.1m)

As forecast last year, Manchester City enter the Money
League top ten for the first time in their history jumping
up five places to seventh. Their inaugural participation in
the UEFA Champions League and the commencement
of the club’s ten-year partnership with Etihad Airways
contributed to revenue growth of £77.9m (51%) – the
highest of all Money League clubs. On the pitch, City
became English League Champions for the first time in
44 years after a dramatic climax to the Premier League
season. However, their strong league form did not
translate to the European stage and they failed to qualify
from the group stages of the UEFA Champions League
and were knocked out of the UEFA Europa League at
the last 16 stage.
City’s broadcast revenue increased by £19.4m (28%)
thanks largely to the receipt of UEFA Champions League
and UEFA Europa League distributions totalling £22.5m
(€27.8m). This compares with Europa League
distributions in the previous year of £5.5m (€6.1m) and
highlights the importance of UEFA Champions League
participation to the top Money League clubs.
Domestically, City were the recipients of the highest
payout of all Premier League clubs receiving £60.6m
(€74.9m) in broadcast payments after winning the
Premier League, an increase of £5m (€6.1m) from the
previous season when they finished in third place.

Despite playing two fewer home matches in 2011/12
than in the previous season matchday revenue grew by
£4.2m (16%). The 3% increase in average home league
attendance to 47,045 and the quality of match on offer
to the fans through UEFA Champions League
participation were the major factors in this increase.
The club achieved an impressive 99% utilisation of the
Etihad Stadium in 2011/12 for league matches.
On-pitch success has brought more fans through the
turnstiles with the club reporting that attendances have
grown by 10% since 2008/09.
Commercial revenue almost doubled to £112.1m
(€138.5m). The most significant component of this
growth was the commencement of the new partnership
with Etihad Airways. As Premier League champions and
now regular Champions League participants, the club
will undoubtedly look to capitalise commercially on their
global status. In 2012/13 they have already agreed a
new deal with Hugo Boss and announced a kit deal with
Nike from the start of the 2013/14 season.
City’s impressive revenue growth has seen them
climb the Money League rapidly. In order to have a
chance to maintain a top ten place or challenge the top
five, the club must strive for improved UEFA Champions
League performance and continue to develop their
commercial potential.

[Ironpot]

Just stumbled across this from Deloittes, below is their section on us but the stats for the other clubs can be found in this link.......

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Uni ... e-2013.pdf

Deloitte Football Money League 2013

We are ranked 7th in Europe

Revenue for 2011/12 season

Match day (£30.8m)
Broadcasting (£88.2m)
Commercial (£112.1m)

As forecast last year, Manchester City enter the Money
League top ten for the first time in their history jumping
up five places to seventh. Their inaugural participation in
the UEFA Champions League and the commencement
of the club’s ten-year partnership with Etihad Airways
contributed to revenue growth of £77.9m (51%) – the
highest of all Money League clubs. On the pitch, City
became English League Champions for the first time in
44 years after a dramatic climax to the Premier League
season. However, their strong league form did not
translate to the European stage and they failed to qualify
from the group stages of the UEFA Champions League
and were knocked out of the UEFA Europa League at
the last 16 stage.
City’s broadcast revenue increased by £19.4m (28%)
thanks largely to the receipt of UEFA Champions League
and UEFA Europa League distributions totalling £22.5m
(€27.8m). This compares with Europa League
distributions in the previous year of £5.5m (€6.1m) and
highlights the importance of UEFA Champions League
participation to the top Money League clubs.
Domestically, City were the recipients of the highest
payout of all Premier League clubs receiving £60.6m
(€74.9m) in broadcast payments after winning the
Premier League, an increase of £5m (€6.1m) from the
previous season when they finished in third place.

Despite playing two fewer home matches in 2011/12
than in the previous season matchday revenue grew by
£4.2m (16%). The 3% increase in average home league
attendance to 47,045 and the quality of match on offer
to the fans through UEFA Champions League
participation were the major factors in this increase.
The club achieved an impressive 99% utilisation of the
Etihad Stadium in 2011/12 for league matches.
On-pitch success has brought more fans through the
turnstiles with the club reporting that attendances have
grown by 10% since 2008/09.
Commercial revenue almost doubled to £112.1m
(€138.5m). The most significant component of this
growth was the commencement of the new partnership
with Etihad Airways. As Premier League champions and
now regular Champions League participants, the club
will undoubtedly look to capitalise commercially on their
global status. In 2012/13 they have already agreed a
new deal with Hugo Boss and announced a kit deal with
Nike from the start of the 2013/14 season.
City’s impressive revenue growth has seen them
climb the Money League rapidly. In order to have a
chance to maintain a top ten place or challenge the top
five, the club must strive for improved UEFA Champions
League performance and continue to develop their
commercial potential.

interesting link - from this it looks like United could be overtaken by Munich this time - if Munich make the Champs League final.

[maxxi]

Off topic

Soccer-Bayern boss Hoeness probed for suspected tax evasion


Reuters – 9 hours ago

BERLIN, April 20 (Reuters) - Bayern Munich president Uli Hoeness is under investigation for possible tax evasion after filing a complaint against himself about a Swiss bank account, he said on Saturday.

"Through my tax consultant I filed a complaint about me in January 2013 with the tax authorities," Hoeness told German news magazine Focus. "It was in relation to a Swiss bank account of mine."

Munich's prosecutor's office confirmed there was an ongoing procedure in relation to the complaint filed by Hoeness but gave no details of the amount involved.

By filing a complaint about possible tax evasion, culprits in Germany can sometimes expect more leniency and reduced fines.
Bayern, who play Barcelona in the Champions League semi-finals on Tuesday, did not want to comment on the issue.


Oh the irony in that stupid hypocritical tax dodger!

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/soccer-bay ... --sow.html

[Im_Spartacus]

What is very interesting on the match day revenue aspect, is that city's match day revenue per seat, is approximately £450

Uniteds is £1350

Now this is a very rudimentary calculation, but could anyone tell me why, our average revenue per seat over the course of a season, would be less than the cost of our lowest cost season ticket!

Because forget building a bigger ground - this is a obviously a problem which needs to be addressed by the club

[Blue Since 76]

What is very interesting on the match day revenue aspect, is that city's match day revenue per seat, is approximately £450

Uniteds is £1350

Now this is a very rudimentary calculation, but could anyone tell me why, our average revenue per seat over the course of a season, would be less than the cost of our lowest cost season ticket!

Because forget building a bigger ground - this is a obviously a problem which needs to be addressed by the club

That's not the lowest cost though - an adult's one in the family stand was about £425, a concession £300 and a kid £105. And that's last season, they were cheaper a couple of years ago. I think a concession in the third tier is only around £400 as well. Plus there were the cheapest ticket where you got a seat but couldn't choose where to sit.

[BlueinBosnia]

What is very interesting on the match day revenue aspect, is that city's match day revenue per seat, is approximately £450

Uniteds is £1350

Now this is a very rudimentary calculation, but could anyone tell me why, our average revenue per seat over the course of a season, would be less than the cost of our lowest cost season ticket!

Because forget building a bigger ground - this is a obviously a problem which needs to be addressed by the club

Isn't it partly because we don't force ST holders to sign up to cup schemes? Also, we reduce prices significantly for cup games. So, effectively, we could sell half the tickets at half the price, whereas the Rags could sell their full allocation at full price, meaning we get a quarter of the amount they do for cup games. Cup runs, and whether these games are home or away also have an effect (although we had 3 home domestic cup games, compared to their 1). Also I have a feeling we didn't sell out for any of our CL games (46K v Bayern was the highest attendance).

Add to this the fact that our seats are cheaper, and that 'matchday revenue' also includes lucrative pre-season tours from what I interpret (the pre-season 2011-12 we wouldn't have been as big a crowd-puller as now), and that's an explanation for a fair amount of the gap.

[kinkylola]

I think it is fantastic that we outstrip them in commercial incone, even though that may change with their new deal, we are still up there.

I can imagine the next few seasons will see us focus on pushing matchday up, which as I said, may be a bit of a rough trip for a lot of fans ... But necessary to compete under ffp conditions unfortunately. Just another way platini is screwing the fans of the game.

[Im_Spartacus]

Isn't it partly because we don't force ST holders to sign up to cup schemes? Also, we reduce prices significantly for cup games. So, effectively, we could sell half the tickets at half the price, whereas the Rags could sell their full allocation at full price, meaning we get a quarter of the amount they do for cup games. Cup runs, and whether these games are home or away also have an effect (although we had 3 home domestic cup games, compared to their 1). Also I have a feeling we didn't sell out for any of our CL games (46K v Bayern was the highest attendance).

Add to this the fact that our seats are cheaper, and that 'matchday revenue' also includes lucrative pre-season tours from what I interpret (the pre-season 2011-12 we wouldn't have been as big a crowd-puller as now), and that's an explanation for a fair amount of the gap.

My mate paid £42 for Wigan this week. A Scouser mate of mine paid £52 in the away end for the Liverpool game.

Whilst our season tickets may be reasonably priced, our match day tickets are far from cheap.

Discounting our ticket for cup games barely scratches the surface of the deficit.

My point really is that united aren't an overly expensive club to watch for the average fan, yet their average ticket price is huge. They do have the cup scheme but they rarely reach a domestic cup final these days so have a max of one or two games in the cups at home.

Its all down to exploiting the hospitality market. I'm told they have 8500 hospitality seats at various values, ranging from £200k for a big box, to £2k for a lounge ticket with no catering.

To get the average take per seat to over 3 times ours, these hospitality seats must be paying seriously massive money, circa 7500 each on average to get to the sort of figures we are looking at.

[Beefymcfc]

Isn't it partly because we don't force ST holders to sign up to cup schemes? Also, we reduce prices significantly for cup games. So, effectively, we could sell half the tickets at half the price, whereas the Rags could sell their full allocation at full price, meaning we get a quarter of the amount they do for cup games. Cup runs, and whether these games are home or away also have an effect (although we had 3 home domestic cup games, compared to their 1). Also I have a feeling we didn't sell out for any of our CL games (46K v Bayern was the highest attendance).

Add to this the fact that our seats are cheaper, and that 'matchday revenue' also includes lucrative pre-season tours from what I interpret (the pre-season 2011-12 we wouldn't have been as big a crowd-puller as now), and that's an explanation for a fair amount of the gap.

My mate paid £42 for Wigan this week. A Scouser mate of mine paid £52 in the away end for the Liverpool game.

Whilst our season tickets may be reasonably priced, our match day tickets are far from cheap.

Discounting our ticket for cup games barely scratches the surface of the deficit.

My point really is that united aren't an overly expensive club to watch for the average fan, yet their average ticket price is huge. They do have the cup scheme but they rarely reach a domestic cup final these days so have a max of one or two games in the cups at home.

Its all down to exploiting the hospitality market. I'm told they have 8500 hospitality seats at various values, ranging from £200k for a big box, to £2k for a lounge ticket with no catering.

To get the average take per seat to over 3 times ours, these hospitality seats must be paying seriously massive money, circa 7500 each on average to get to the sort of figures we are looking at.

Although they have higher priced seats than ours, and more of them, their hospitality is where it's at. When doing business you need to be associated with numero uno and that's where they are at.