Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
blahblahblah

Get your fag packets out - here is where the money went !

Recommended Posts

Far too much information in there for a ''certain type of poster'' as phrases such as ''if i remember correctly'' and ''from memory'' are usually the order of the day.Personally i shall wait for Purple to post on the matter.[:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well morty, some people on here like this sort of thing, you know, the numbers behind it all and that.  So I thought I would post a link to this sort of thing, because it''s the sort of thing that they would like.And that''s it really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wise to hold your fire tilly old chap :).Incidentally, I see from your signature..."A man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life."..that it is very likely that I have wasted 20 years of my life.  Any advice you can offer for the next 10 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange fellows.

All it says to me is "All the clubs made money, some made more because they were on the telly more"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if you''re happy living your life without forensic level analysis of finances morty, that''s great.  More time to get the beers in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now all we need is advertising, sponsorship, transfers (in and out), wages, Foreign and Domestic cup payments, non-football related finances, etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m with Morty at this one, but nevertheless, Howson''s goal nicely gave us a few extra quid!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It says we had 10 games shown live and infact we only had 7. I thought Sky + ESPN combined had to show each team live at least 10 times a season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Manchester Canary"]It says we had 10 games shown live and infact we only had 7. I thought Sky + ESPN combined had to show each team live at least 10 times a season?[/quote]

Every team is given the equivalent amount of 10 games as a minimum - even if less are shown. It was a decent attempt by the Premier League to make sure every team gets a decent amount of coverage, I doubt Norwich would have had that many without this ruling in place (and surely Stoke would get 0).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the extra 3-4 million we were supposed to have got by winning is an exaggeration - if we''d lost we would have finished in 15th position and earned 1.5 million less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for clearing that up Bethnal.

Just took this from the Pink Un home page story.

"The league champions next season can expect to earn close to £100million in broadcast earnings while the bottom club, which this season was QPR, can expect their earnings to go up from £39.8million to around £63million - more than United earned from the most recent campaign"

So with an extra £23 million min coming in next season, and £20 odd million we would have probably spent if the TV revenue were the same as this season, i''d imagine our transfer budget to be around £40 million for players fees and wages! Exciting summer ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Kangaroo Court"]So the extra 3-4 million we were supposed to have got by winning is an exaggeration - if we''d lost we would have finished in 15th position and earned 1.5 million less.[/quote]On the basis of how the other results turned out, that is true, but if some teams below us that lost on Sunday had got different results and we had lost we could have been below 15th.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting to note that next season 20th place, instead of  over £39million will get £63million3 million more than United got for winning it this season !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No K.C., if we''d finished in 15th we would have got ~£m less as each position is worth £755,881 in merit payments, the only reason that Villa (who finihsed in 15th) were only £1.5m worse off is because they got almost £2m more than us in ''facility'' payments from being on the telly 14 times over the course of the season to our minimum payment equivalent to 10 live games...

 

The table at the bottom of that does raise one question for me though. What happens to the parachute payments of a club if they have been promoted back into the Premiership?

Share this post


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

No K.C., if we''d finished in 15th we would have got ~£3m less as each position is worth £755,881 in merit payments, the only reason that Villa (who finihsed in 15th) were only £1.5m worse off is because they got almost £2m more than us in ''facility'' payments from being on the telly 14 times over the course of the season to our minimum payment equivalent to 10 live games...

 

The table at the bottom of that does raise one question for me though. What happens to the parachute payments of a club if they have been promoted back into the Premiership?

[/quote]

 

Corrected

Share this post


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

The table at the bottom of that does raise one question for me though. What happens to the parachute payments of a club if they have been promoted back into the Premiership?

[/quote]

If a club still getting parachute payments is promoted back to the Premier league the money they would have been given is divded equally to all the other clubs in the Championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Kangaroo Court"]So the extra 3-4 million we were supposed to have got by winning is an exaggeration - if we''d lost we would have finished in 15th position and earned 1.5 million less.
[/quote]

 

Not quite - there was a payment called "Facilities Fees" which varies by team - 15th placed team (AV) got some £7.7m, whilst we, along with 7 other teams, only got some £5.8m (even QPR got over £6m for this!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Bethnal... So, when the parachute payments are up to £12m+ will we see the teams with nothing left to play for in the championship giving teams with the parachute payments an easy ride in the hope they get promoted? It would be worth an extra £500k to them , which is a fair chunk for a lot of teams, especially considering there isn''t the merit payment system in the champ so it makes no financial difference between 10th and 16th...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for being slightly OT but I do hope the board are intending to replace our PA system for next season. It''s so poor it''s a wonder an H&S zealot hasn''t pounced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Manchester Canary"]It says we had 10 games shown live and infact we only had 7. I thought Sky + ESPN combined had to show each team live at least 10 times a season?[/quote]

Every team is given the equivalent amount of 10 games as a minimum - even if less are shown. It was a decent attempt by the Premier League to make sure every team gets a decent amount of coverage, I doubt Norwich would have had that many without this ruling in place (and surely Stoke would get 0).

[/quote]

 

The Guardian weekly talk-in thingy with James Richardson had a competition for suggestions as to how Sky should "sell" the deeply unappealing upcoming QPR vs Reading fixture when both were  already relegated or as near as dammit. My suggestion, based on another game that weekend, was:"It was that or Stoke vs Norwich."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too am hoping Purple will have some interesting insight into all this.

 

Now all is said and done, what I would really like to know is how this leaves the overall finances of the club. From things I''ve seen before, all external debt should now be paid off, and we''re left with one of the most efficiently run clubs in the league (in terms of how self-sufficient the club is, percentage of wages vs turnover etc, as we''re still a business and not a sugar-daddy''s play thing)

Interestingly I remember Sam Allardyce complaining that West Ham would not be allowed to sign Andy Carroll under the new Financial Fair Play rules, and of course the need for a certain amount of British players in the squad will also have the big boys worrying.

Debt-free, youth-cup winners and the ability to realistically offer a chance of first team football to budding stars, Academy 1 status, No financial fair play restrictions, relatively low wages currently, high percentage of British-based players already. It would seem we have far fewer restrictions than some of our rivals, plenty to offer and perhaps the fewest financial restricitons the club has ever had. All seems very rosey doesnt it.

 

Id be really interested if someone (Purple) could give us a brief overview of the clubs finances and potential war-chest for next season based on prior knowledge known and this current information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

I too am hoping Purple will have some interesting insight into all this.

 

Now all is said and done, what I would really like to know is how this leaves the overall finances of the club. From things I''ve seen before, all external debt should now be paid off, and we''re left with one of the most efficiently run clubs in the league (in terms of how self-sufficient the club is, percentage of wages vs turnover etc, as we''re still a business and not a sugar-daddy''s play thing)

Interestingly I remember Sam Allardyce complaining that West Ham would not be allowed to sign Andy Carroll under the new Financial Fair Play rules, and of course the need for a certain amount of British players in the squad will also have the big boys worrying.

Debt-free, youth-cup winners and the ability to realistically offer a chance of first team football to budding stars, Academy 1 status, No financial fair play restrictions, relatively low wages currently, high percentage of British-based players already. It would seem we have far fewer restrictions than some of our rivals, plenty to offer and perhaps the fewest financial restricitons the club has ever had. All seems very rosey doesnt it.

 

Id be really interested if someone (Purple) could give us a brief overview of the clubs finances and potential war-chest for next season based on prior knowledge known and this current information.

[/quote]

 

For what it is worth I was planning to post one of my interminable pieces in  a few days'' time. Probably at the weekend. We are in an interesting and generally good position, but there are some counter-points to be made, to provide some perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

I too am hoping Purple will have some interesting insight into all this.

 

Now all is said and done, what I would really like to know is how this leaves the overall finances of the club. From things I''ve seen before, all external debt should now be paid off, and we''re left with one of the most efficiently run clubs in the league (in terms of how self-sufficient the club is, percentage of wages vs turnover etc, as we''re still a business and not a sugar-daddy''s play thing)

Interestingly I remember Sam Allardyce complaining that West Ham would not be allowed to sign Andy Carroll under the new Financial Fair Play rules, and of course the need for a certain amount of British players in the squad will also have the big boys worrying.

Debt-free, youth-cup winners and the ability to realistically offer a chance of first team football to budding stars, Academy 1 status, No financial fair play restrictions, relatively low wages currently, high percentage of British-based players already. It would seem we have far fewer restrictions than some of our rivals, plenty to offer and perhaps the fewest financial restricitons the club has ever had. All seems very rosey doesnt it.

 

Id be really interested if someone (Purple) could give us a brief overview of the clubs finances and potential war-chest for next season based on prior knowledge known and this current information.

[/quote]

 

For what it is worth I was planning to post one of my interminable pieces in  a few days'' time. Probably at the weekend. We are in an interesting and generally good position, but there are some counter-points to be made, to provide some perspective.

[/quote]

 

I look forward to reading that  :)

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  

×