Deloitte Football Money League--Why we're doing pretty well, considering

[jambreck]

Interesting that Deloitte have declared Spurs' turnover for the financial year 2012-13 before Spurs have even published their year end accounts.

I can't help thinking that either Spurs or Deloitte have dropped a bollock over this.

 

[Lilbaz]

Yep. they needc to bring out a football debt list. there would be a very different looking top 10 then.

They did last year. They've also did an asset list which Arsenal tops.

 

[jambreck]

As I just posted in the thread in general football, comparing ourselves to Liverpool you can see where almost all of their extra revenue comes from: commercial deals. This is one of the reasons I was so pissed off with us selling Bale regardless of money offered - choosing a quick buck over the chance of a much larger and more sustainable long term gain.

There was no "long term" for Bale at Spurs. He was determined to leave. At most, we could have kept him for another season and, even then, it's unlikely that we would have got as much out of him after denying him his dream move.

Any sponsor could have guessed that Bale would not long be at Spurs - especially with Real Madrid on the prowl and Bale expressing his desire to join them. So no sponsor would have signed a deal with Spurs that envisaged a long term future for Bale at the club - even if we had forced him to stay this summer.

 

[DogsOfWar]

This shows we need CL and a new stadium just to catch up with Liverpool.

But what winds me up is the sudden rise in PSG and City's revenue with sponsorship deals well beyond their commercial value.
It was/is an obvious way to circumvent FFP rules and UEFA should simply ban them from CL football but they don't have the balls.

 

[Buggsy61]

I am very sceptical about these numbers as I can't see West Ham on the list!

Seriously though, it does show that the club is being well run and CL and a new stadium would take us into the top 10. We are ripe for a takeover, but maybe missed the boat for a sugar daddy as there doesn't seem to be a point in numerous ones trying to outbid each other, other than for ego purposes.

 

[Ironskullll]

member: 14393"]Only ever tells half a story which is why I personally hate these 'football rich lists'.[/quote]
Agreed. My accountant friend always used to say 'it's not the turnover that matters, it's what's left over'.

 

[jambreck]

While turnover is indeed only half the story (or maybe even less), it is still the most important financial indicator in terms of the ability to pay transfer fees and player wages.

A club which reports a profit of £10m on turnover of £100m is, sadly, unlikely to be genuine competition for a club which reports a loss of £10m on turnover of £300m.

Profit (or loss), in this instance, is the less important indicator.

 

[Spursidol]

I am very sceptical about these numbers as I can't see West Ham on the list!

.

West Ham in 29th position !

 

[ItsBoris]

All the Premier League clubs will increase by around 40 million this coming year due to the new TV deal.

 

[Booney]

West Ham in 29th position !

And yet Sam Allardyce the 13th highest paid manager in world football. It just gets better.

 

[Spursidol]

And yet Sam Allardyce the 13th highest paid manager in world football. It just gets better.

They paid their manager on the basis of where they would like to be

Deluded !

 

[mark87]

 

[Yorkville Spur]

Chipper up buckaroo!

 

[RichieS]

Yep. they needc to bring out a football debt list. there would be a very different looking top 10 then.

Isn't your point that the debt list would in fact include much the same teams in the top 10? Bayern and Arsenal carry very little debt and I don't know about the Italian sides, but the others there are up to their eyeballs!

 

[Lilbaz]

They paid their manager on the basis of where they would like to be

Deluded !

I always thought it was by weight.

 

[Syn_13]

West Ham in 29th position !

It'll be a hell of a lot lower next year when they're in the Championship.