So it looks like Dr. Allams huge investment in City is about to pay off (God/Allah) Bless him. I've heard some huge figures bandied about but does anyone really know how much promotion is worth to us?
I think it's £150 in the bank for getting promoted this year. Slightly o/t but I was wondering the other day a few things: 1. What % of the shares do the Allams actually own? 2. Are there other members of the board or even any outsiders also investing or is it purely the Allams cash? 3. Is it assems club or shared with ehab? 4. Lets start a fans fundraising campaign to buy drogba.
The Allam's own 100% of the shares, there are no outside investors, the club is owned by Allamhouse Ltd, which is jointly owned by Assem and Ehab. Drogba would be nice... Oh and it's £150m, rather than £150.
I know you didn't ask me, but I think that's the total amount over 5 years if you get promoted, then relegated after a season with parachute payments included in that figure.
Aye the £150M is what you get for getting promoted, usually in one season you get about 80M and the rest is spread about over a few years. If any of you wanted to know more about the club and its accounts, read http://companycheck.co.uk/company/04032392#summary-tab Really good for in depth look at clubs, its not the normal website i use but i have lost the other one i use, so will check it out when i find it. Edit: https://www.duedil.com/company/04032392/hull-city-tigers-limited - There you go that websites a bit better to use.
Currently relegated clubs get £48m over four seasons (£16m in the first two seasons, £8m in the next two – payments cease if they go back up) . League position of clubs with payments Parachute payments 2012-13: Club Payment Position Hull City £8m 2 Burnley £8m 12 Blackpool £13m 14 Blackburn £16m 13 Bolton £16m 16 Wolves £16m 18 Birmingham £13m 20 Portsmouth £8m 22(L1)
There may be a lot of money handed over for getting promoted but a lot is usually spent on buying players and their wages.
Exactly, the raise seems like it would make us a lot stronger, but players and agents will ask for a lot more and whatever extra we get from the increased PL money will just end up straight in their pockets.
I agree with that but clubs like Swansea, Norwich and West Brom continue to make profits or at least break even, so they show it can be done without losing a fortune.
True. But it's all about getting the right players in at the end of the day. I read an article about Swansea, who are held up all the time as the right way to run a club, their wage bill went from 15 million in the championship to 35 million first season in the premiership. If Rodgers hadn't been dumb enough to pay 15 million for joe Allen they would ve made zero profit.
There is a lump sum paid to each club from the UK and overseas TV rights deal to each club. Then there are additional payments made by Sky/BT for coverage per match televised. The income of the club is further boosted by increased gate receipts and commercial activities and a final finishing place payment. The parachute payments and solidarity payments make up about half of the £150m total figure which is often quoted, which is purely arbitory as it could be more or less depending on success on the field. The £150 is based on a single season in the PL followed by 4 years of parachute payments. It would actually be preferable to retain premier league status for as long as possible because if a club is relegated after say 3 seasons they will have benefitted from the TV deal payments year on year which would be higher than the parachute payments, but they are a guarenteed amount over 4 seasons if the worst happens. I would fully expect at least some of the money to go towards the holding company to bring down its exposure. Anyway, we got to get there first.
My point wasn't that we can't compete without making losses, but that £150m looks at face value enough to build a squad, invest in facilities, possibly even bank some to fall back on, but due to the high likeliness players wages, agents thefts and even transfer fees will rise considerably, we'd probably be no better off than going up with the old amount of money. Ie we will still have to spend the same percentage of our income, just the figures will raise, if you know what I mean.
I can’t see the Allam’s parting with vast amounts of money on agents fees (unlike our previous incumbents). Would love to be a fly on the wall during transfer negotiations
I canât see the Allamâs parting with vast amounts of money on agents fees (unlike our previous incumbents). Would love to be a fly on the wall during transfer negotiations
