Change in Premiership financial regulations?

[Gash]

They have Champions League and a realistic league expectation though to manage the debt slightly.

[wacko]

They have Champions League and a realistic league expectation though to manage the debt slightly.

 

You can't pay off £1.1bn with the winnings from the league and the CL. Wouldn't even cover the interest.

[Gash]

It would take out more of a chunk than winning The Europa League.

[Guest Stephen927]

Well, duh.

[wacko]

It would take out more of a chunk than winning The Europa League.

 

Actually, that's likely wrong. There are more games in the Europa League, and in Man Utd's case, the additional gate receipts would likely outweigh the higher prize money.

[Parky]

Greedy players will have to tighten their S-Class habits.

[Teasy]

It would take out more of a chunk than winning The Europa League.

 

Actually, that's likely wrong. There are more games in the Europa League, and in Man Utd's case, the additional gate receipts would likely outweigh the higher prize money.

 

You must be joking, a few extra games isn't going to make up for Champions League prize/TV money.

 

Not to mention I seriously doubt they'd regularly fill their stadium for Europa League games.

[wacko]

It would take out more of a chunk than winning The Europa League.

 

Actually, that's likely wrong. There are more games in the Europa League, and in Man Utd's case, the additional gate receipts would likely outweigh the higher prize money.

 

You must be joking, a few extra games isn't going to make up for Champions League prize/TV money.

 

Not to mention I seriously doubt they'd regularly fill their stadium for Europa League games.

 

It's not that simple. It really isn't. Firstly, Europa Cup prizes are up 400% on UEFA Cup prizes. The CL is still worth 3 times as much in terms of prize money alone, but the difference is only €16m (between the winners of each competition). That's 4 games' worth of gate receipts for Man Utd.

 

The market pool (TV money) is more complex, because it's divvied up according to complex rules involving where you placed in the league, and how far you got in the CL/Europa Cup compared to other clubs from your country. If all the teams from your league reach at least the quarters and two reach the semis, that bites into your cut an awful lot.

 

As English clubs seem to do much better in the CL than the Europa Cup, there's potentially a much larger slice of a much smaller pie to be had in the EC. The CL TV pot might be huge, but in recent seasons it has been divided up quite evenly between the English sides.

 

A significant factor is also how you get into the Europa Cup. If you fail into it out of the CL group stage, you'll make a lot more than if you go straight into the EC.

 

Finally, you've obviously got a much better chance of winning the Europa Cup. All the above figures are based on winning the final and every game on the way there. Even the very, very best sides reach the CL semis only 50-60% of the time, whereas, as we demonstrated this season, even a side that fails to get out of the CL group stage and struggles to stay in the Euro places in the EPL has a good chance of success in the EC.

 

All things being equal, winning the CL is worth a lot more money than winning the EC, but all things are not equal, and it's perfectly possible to earn nearly as much or possibly more in the EC, depending on circumstances.

[Teasy]

I wasn't aware that the Europa League had increased the prize money over the Uefa cup, that's interesting.  But TV money is still going to be one of, it not the biggest, factors.

 

Per match prize money, as you say, would be lower, TV money would be lower and crowds would be lower (those prawn sandwich eaters aren't going to turn up for the Europa League, leaving only the 35-40,000 true fans buying tickets).

 

I just don't believe Manure would make more money from being in the Europa League then in the Champions League.  It might be different for a club that can't get past the group stages of the Champs League but can get far in the Europa League, I wouldn't say either way unless I saw more evidence, but not for a team that consistently reaches the later stages of the competition.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

It would take out more of a chunk than winning The Europa League.

 

Actually, that's likely wrong. There are more games in the Europa League, and in Man Utd's case, the additional gate receipts would likely outweigh the higher prize money.

 

You must be joking, a few extra games isn't going to make up for Champions League prize/TV money.

 

Not to mention I seriously doubt they'd regularly fill their stadium for Europa League games.

 

It's not that simple. It really isn't. Firstly, Europa Cup prizes are up 400% on UEFA Cup prizes. The CL is still worth 3 times as much in terms of prize money alone, but the difference is only 16m (between the winners of each competition). That's 4 games' worth of gate receipts for Man Utd.

 

The market pool (TV money) is more complex, because it's divvied up according to complex rules involving where you placed in the league, and how far you got in the CL/Europa Cup compared to other clubs from your country. If all the teams from your league reach at least the quarters and two reach the semis, that bites into your cut an awful lot.

 

As English clubs seem to do much better in the CL than the Europa Cup, there's potentially a much larger slice of a much smaller pie to be had in the EC. The CL TV pot might be huge, but in recent seasons it has been divided up quite evenly between the English sides.

 

A significant factor is also how you get into the Europa Cup. If you fail into it out of the CL group stage, you'll make a lot more than if you go straight into the EC.

 

Finally, you've obviously got a much better chance of winning the Europa Cup. All the above figures are based on winning the final and every game on the way there. Even the very, very best sides reach the CL semis only 50-60% of the time, whereas, as we demonstrated this season, even a side that fails to get out of the CL group stage and struggles to stay in the Euro places in the EPL has a good chance of success in the EC.

 

All things being equal, winning the CL is worth a lot more money than winning the EC, but all things are not equal, and it's perfectly possible to earn nearly as much or possibly more in the EC, depending on circumstances.

 

So not qualifying for the Champions League was a cunning money making plan dreamt up by those crafty Americans.  Genius.

[wacko]

I wasn't aware that the Europa League had increased the prize money over the Uefa cup, that's interesting.  But TV money is still going to be one of, it not the biggest, factors.

 

Per match prize money, as you say, would be lower, TV money would be lower and crowds would be lower (those prawn sandwich eaters aren't going to turn up for the Europa League, leaving only the 35-40,000 true fans buying tickets).

 

I just don't believe Manure would make more money from being in the Europa League then in the Champions League.  It might be different for a club that can't get past the group stages of the Champs League but can get far in the Europa League, I wouldn't say either way unless I saw more evidence, but not for a team that consistently reaches the later stages of the competition.

 

I think they'd do a pretty good job of filling the stadium on account of the number of people who simply can't get tickets for the more desirable games.

 

Obviously, under most circumstances they'd make more money in the CL, but the EC is not necessarily *that* far behind in potential revenue.

 

So not qualifying for the Champions League was a cunning money making plan dreamt up by those crafty Americans.  Genius.

 

Hardly. Indeed, we'll struggle to make the kind of money we made in the CL under Rafa, because we often got very, very far, and the straight-into-EC route is automatically worth maybe £10m less than the CL-to-EC route just in terms of being there. That said, assuming we get a good manager to replace Rafa, we've got a very good chance of winning it. And an EC win is probably worth more to us financially than a second-round or quarter-final exit from the CL, which is a far more realistic result for our side now we don't have a master of European footie in charge.

 

[leffe186]

A little bit of the new Deloitte figures:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10249101.stm

 

and

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10253000.stm

 

Shows the extent to which the wages/turnover issue is not confined to England - also cocks two fingers at the guy who applauded Rafa for doing so well with the fifth highest wage bill. Still extraordinary that Chelsea's wage bill is still more than twice that of Man City.

[Teasy]

I wasn't aware that the Europa League had increased the prize money over the Uefa cup, that's interesting.  But TV money is still going to be one of, it not the biggest, factors.

 

Per match prize money, as you say, would be lower, TV money would be lower and crowds would be lower (those prawn sandwich eaters aren't going to turn up for the Europa League, leaving only the 35-40,000 true fans buying tickets).

 

I just don't believe Manure would make more money from being in the Europa League then in the Champions League.  It might be different for a club that can't get past the group stages of the Champs League but can get far in the Europa League, I wouldn't say either way unless I saw more evidence, but not for a team that consistently reaches the later stages of the competition.

 

I think they'd do a pretty good job of filling the stadium on account of the number of people who simply can't get tickets for the more desirable games.

 

Obviously, under most circumstances they'd make more money in the CL, but the EC is not necessarily *that* far behind in potential revenue.

 

 

I bet they'd get somewhere around League Cup kind if attendances, which were around 35-40k last season for Manure.

[wacko]

I bet they'd get somewhere around League Cup kind if attendances, which were around 35-40k last season for Manure.

 

You're probably right on the money there.

 

A little bit of the new Deloitte figures:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10249101.stm

 

and

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10253000.stm

 

Shows the extent to which the wages/turnover issue is not confined to England - also cocks two fingers at the guy who applauded Rafa for doing so well with the fifth highest wage bill. Still extraordinary that Chelsea's wage bill is still more than twice that of Man City.

 

Really interesting articles. Especially the stats on Italy. Wages reached 100% of turnover in 2001, and Serie A hasn't even broken even except in 2006. Unbelievable.

 

Interesting that the EPL as a whole makes money, though not much, and especially that the Bundesliga makes nearly twice as much when there's nowhere near as much cash washing around, and it's cheap as chips to go to German stadia (you can get into most Bundesliga games for under £10).

 

Footie wages are ridiculous, but it's also refreshing to see an industry where the actual workers take home the big money, instead of the pointy-haired bosses.

 

I'm all for clubs being forced to break even longer-term, but I'm against actual wage caps. It's not as if ticket prices would actually drop: all the cash would go into Ashley's/Glazer's/etc. pockets instead.

 

Does anyone know exactly what Chelsea's debt is? Loans from Abramovich?

 

I think they stand to lose most under new restrictions. In Man Utd's and our case, the losses/debt are a result of the purchase of the clubs, in Chelsea's case, it's their actual business model.

[NG32]

I bet they'd get somewhere around League Cup kind if attendances, which were around 35-40k last season for Manure.

 

You're probably right on the money there.

 

A little bit of the new Deloitte figures:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10249101.stm

 

and

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10253000.stm

 

Shows the extent to which the wages/turnover issue is not confined to England - also cocks two fingers at the guy who applauded Rafa for doing so well with the fifth highest wage bill. Still extraordinary that Chelsea's wage bill is still more than twice that of Man City.

 

Really interesting articles. Especially the stats on Italy. Wages reached 100% of turnover in 2001, and Serie A hasn't even broken even except in 2006. Unbelievable.

 

Interesting that the EPL as a whole makes money, though not much, and especially that the Bundesliga makes nearly twice as much when there's nowhere near as much cash washing around, and it's cheap as chips to go to German stadia (you can get into most Bundesliga games for under £10).

 

Footie wages are ridiculous, but it's also refreshing to see an industry where the actual workers take home the big money, instead of the pointy-haired bosses.

 

I'm all for clubs being forced to break even longer-term, but I'm against actual wage caps. It's not as if ticket prices would actually drop: all the cash would go into Ashley's/Glazer's/etc. pockets instead.

 

Does anyone know exactly what Chelsea's debt is? Loans from Abramovich?

 

I think they stand to lose most under new restrictions. In Man Utd's and our case, the losses/debt are a result of the purchase of the clubs, in Chelsea's case, it's their actual business model.

 

They might not have t introduce a salary cap, clubs in 3 or 4 years will most likely have a set bidget...players and agents will have to then adjust their salaries etc to match.

 

We may see a better spread of talent, maybe not.