Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Fish Seller

Team value against Club Turnover

Recommended Posts

 

From here http://www.footballeconomy.com/stats2/eng_norwich.htm.

Financial Overview

Year

Turnover

Pre-tax profit

Wages / Turnover ratio (%)

Employees

2006/07

23.771

0.627

 

208

2005/06

24.116

3.065

 

214

2005/06

24.700

 

 

 

2004/05

37.426

9.166

45.2

201

2003/04

13.928

-3.265

 

185

2002/03

12.965

-4.681

77.1

170

2001/02

15.271

0.440

54.2

167

2000/01

9.391

0.976

86.4

162

1999/00

7.696

-0.754

88.7

143

1998/99

6.236

-2.966

91.6

109

1997/98

6.910

0.600

65.5

96

1996/97

6.271

-1.176

61.1

90

1995/96

6.530

0.224

 

106

1994/95

7.855

1.111

 

 

1993/94

9.477

0.863

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chase was villified for his off field investments, despite leaving us with a team valued at approximately TWICE the Clubs annual turnover.

We now have a team worth approximately just ONE FIFTH of the Clubs annual turnover.

Nothing more to say to this really, the figures speak for thmselves and probably go a long way to explaining our current plight..

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff which will probably be ignored by those who just make it up as they go along. The trouble with the wage percentage figure is that it is an overall figure, not just player wages. In City`s case this masks the true picture as non-football wages keep going up year-on-year which skews the overall figure.

Player wages as a percentage of turnover were 45% in the promotion season, 28% in the prem, 36% first season back down and 32% last season. So as a percentage of turnover player wages have actually been massively cut since the Sky money started rolling in. If you pay peanuts you get.....

And despite raking in £14.2m in parachute payments and £16m in player sales since relegation we now have a squad which cost less than £5m to assemble! You have to admire them in a way for getting away with it, but then seeing how easily-lead the average City fan seems to be maybe it`s not such a suprise......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The club have attempted to create a state of financial independence from TV money - to an extent understandable after the collapse of ITV digital.  As it happens, TV money has got larger and larger over time, meaning that the clubs'' longer-term attempts to make money haven''t kept up with the pace of the TV deals.Do you blame the club for not wanting to have to rely upon hand-outs from Rupert Murdoch ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Roedent"]

Nothing more to say to this really, the figures speak for thmselves and probably go a long way to explaining our current plight..

[/quote]

There is more to say. More I''d like you to say as well (see the 2nd paragraph).

Football and the economy has changed since the early/mid 90''s, you just haven''t taken this into account when looking at the facts and figures and before making that statement.

Neither the figures nor the article say that our team was valued at approximately twice the clubs annual turnover under Robert Chase (and at what point in his tenure as chairman as well please? I presume you mean 93/94) nor does it say that we have a team worth approximately one fifth of the clubs annual turnover. I presume you''ve done a back of the fag packet style estimation of our teams in order to make that statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...