Spurs overtake City in money league but have ground for concerns

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...gue-but-have-ground-for-concerns-6671041.html

Tottenham's first season in the Champions League drove a dramatic increase in revenue that lifted them above Manchester City – the club they edged out of fourth spot in the Premier League two years ago – in the latest Deloitte European Football Money League. But the report also highlights the need for Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea to resolve their stadium issues if they are to keep pace financially with the Manchester clubs and Arsenal.

Tottenham's run last year to the last eight of the Champions League helped boost their revenue by 36 per cent to a record £163.5m and their matchday revenue by 18 per cent. But at £47.9m it remains around half of the totals raised by Arsenal and Manchester United. Chelsea took £67.5m on matchdays and Liverpool £40.9m. Manchester City's was only £26.6m for the 2010-11 season but that will grow rapidly with Champions League football this season.

Like United and Arsenal, City have the security (aside from the small matter of a Qatari fortune) of having a ground ready for the future, unlike Tottenham, Liverpool and Chelsea. "[Resolving their ground issues] is hugely important," said Dan Jones, the editor of the report. "If you look at the relativities of different clubs, you can clearly see the advantage Manchester United and Arsenal are reaping from the investment they have made in their stadia, versus Chelsea, Liverpool and Tottenham, who are all capacity-restrained by where they are. It's no surprise they are looking carefully at their stadium options."

The table also underlines the importance of reaching the Champions League for those trying to close the gap on the top six in Europe, which remained the same for the fourth year in succession with Real Madrid and Barcelona leading Manchester United.

"Champions League qualification is the great differentiator," said Jones. "The benefits are pretty clear. Despite the growth of Manchester City, Tottenham managing to leapfrog them will probably surprise people. It is not the whole cake but it is a very, very significant icing on the top. Next season expect to see City in the top 10 and that will be in large part due to Champions League qualification."

Money league table

Rank/Club/Revenue (£m)

1 (1) Real Madrid 433.0

2 (2) Barcelona 407.0

3 (3) Manchester Utd 331.4

4 (4) Bayern Munich 290.3

5 (5) Arsenal 226.8

6 (6) Chelsea 225.6

7 (7) Milan 212.3

8 (9) Internazionale 190.9

9 (8) Liverpool 183.6

10 (16) Schalke 04 182.8

11 (12) Tottenham H 163.5

12 (11) Manchester City 153.2

13 (10) Juventus 139.0

14 (15) Marseilles 135.8

15 (18) Roma 129.6

 

Wow! Just look at how much Arsenal and Chelsea earned!

Jesus! It's going to be crippling for them, not being in the CL, next season!

No wonder the Russian oligarch is taking over training sessions, at Chelsea!

 

Our revenue will obviously be down this season. I wonder by how much, and whether this January's cost-cutting was enough to see us still make a profit?

 

Err! not that rapid, when did he write this? You get good money for wins, goals and getting to the knockout stage in the CL, not wobbling around making the numbers up.

 

You get around £18m for appearing in the group stages of the CL (not including matchday revenue), whilst getting all the way to the final of the Europa League made Fulham half that amount. So that's enough reason for Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool to be worried - so expect a renewed commitment to the FA and Carling Cups in seasons to come as an insurance policy.

 

Interesting to see a couple of German clubs in there, who appear to be succeeding in spite of considerably lower ticket prices.
You'd expect to see Bayern amongst the top earners, but Schalke are probably punching above their weight a bit.
They don't field a team of superstars and had a bizarre season, winning their domestic cup and reaching the Champions League semi-final, but finishing 14th in the Bundesliga, only 4 points off a relegation play-off.

It'd be interesting to see how some of the non-fashionable clubs do in other leagues.

 

Why exactly are Schalke punching above their wieght, football is a business, Schalke have alot of fans, more than spurs maybe, that's a good bedrock to build on, they have made it further in the CL than spurs last season, why are they exactly is punching above their weight?

A sound plan and wise investment can make any business grow bringing in ore revenue, ala Arse, a well run plan and for their outgoings they have done a cracking job as a business, as a club is another matter conisidering the profile they have. Liverpool are where spurs were a couple of seasons ago but are higher profile so the laughs are bigger

Spurs have invested shrewdly in players that have come good over a few seasons and with hte success of those players brings CL footy and higher mleague position, but.. it starts with a plan and needs wise investment, which is working out as ye know better than anyone.

So how again are shalke punching above their weight when it seems they are being run quite well, like spurs.?


How the fk did you become a mod anyway, says a lot about this particular board.

 

Yep, Schalke's semi final in the CL must have earned them plenty. Probably £40m+ , I don't know how they're doing this season.

 

because he said something you disagree with does not mean he is not an able mod...as for your post..you did start to throw your toys out of the pram a little near the end....says more about you that you start crying when you dont hear what you want to hear...bet its fun living with you.

 

They got that 40m based on their previous league finish and currnent run in that CL, they did it on their previous revenue, with 40 extra into the kitty with some work they can do better, if the cash is used wisely. Sure Spurs have had their run, dropped down to EL and now look to be back in, htey didnt go and blow hte cash earned ona bunch of high profile players though you did concede 4th to that run, bad decision, but not hurting so much when it looks tro be back on next year but last season I bet it was seen as a mistake financially, or was it, Spurs had a good run and lots of exposure to flog the club abroad. so really, it could mean instead of a 40m in a season you didnt qualify, maybe you'll earn 200m over three years instead because of that exposure to other markets.

 

no, he comes on our board like most other roaming knobs, with cheap shots poor stamina and wum. A mod, please. B4F or Swarbs, they are mods, this guy, please


And you picking the part of my post that takes no effort to reply to because the rest is far too much work for a troll

 

How the fk did you become a mod anyway, says a lot about this particular board.[/QUOTE]

He really doesn't like you PNP, does he?
(see also 'Arry staying thread..... )

 

Was any of this intended to be in a language people outside your immediate gene pool could understand?

 

What the **** are you on about, BBF?
When do I WUM the Liverpool board?
Are you still crying because of the way that you embarrassed yourself on the match thread the other day?

Schalke are the rough equivalent of Everton, so their financial return for that season is clearly higher than you'd expect.
I pointed out why they were punching above their weight in my original comment (Cup win, CL semi).
Why this appears to have upset you is beyond me and anyone normal too, probably.

 

Even Liverpool fans seem to be disowning BBF.

 

LDL, completely agree. How exactly did they "earn" that money then? Not sure if included in these figures, but sponsorship deals from airlines that are not run on a proper commercial basis shouldn't really count should they.

 

I understand that the FFP rules include a number of stipulations including sponsorship will not be allowed from companies that don't operate at a profit and/or are subsidised by national governments or whose turnover is less than the value of the sponsorship provided.

 

Really? Doesn't that completely disallow the Etihad sponsorship?

 

It would, yes.