http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-City-climb-fifth-Bayern-Munich-come-top.html Notice that there's only $41 difference between the four English clubs of City, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool. Can any of you bean-counters (and Tobes!) tell me if this has any significance in, say, interest rates on loans for players and/or ground developments?
in short its complete bollox, entirely subjective. If you got it out of Deloitte or some such willing to put actual rep on line and back the numbers fine but what it actually says is that as bayern win in germany and claim half of eastern europe as well as german as fans they must be a marketing gold mine. ergo soemone will pay more to for sponsorship etc etc. yes real who are the brand are rated down to to spains economic woes yet ticket prices etc etc if anything have increased.......
Sadly $41 million difference... Not an expert, but I wouldn't have thought the brand valuation would have a direct effect on interest rates, as brand valuation is simply a hypothetical subjective valuation of an intangible asset. Banks would more likely look at the pure financial situation (revenues, profits, cash etc.) and future prospects. That said, several factors used in the brand valuation (revenue mix, growth) may well be used in the bank's decision making process. Is it just me or is no source quoted? Or have the Mail concoted this themselves? So more or less what MITO said while I was writing.
I have always thought it very difficult to put an objective value on a brand. I would have thought that the top 5 would be Bayern, Real, Barca, MU, and Liverpool. That's just my opinion based on my perception travelling abroad.
well... i dunno... say you want to build a 150million stadium... then it matters, you want 10mil for a player off a bank... meh... It would be more about the bottom line. I think it might matter more if say like utd they were all on the stock market and investors were picking and choosing based on return. I am not sure who in their right mind would buy a utd share. nothing against utd as they are one of the extremely few clubs it works for but this is more about any club warren buffet tells us to buy and hold as small individual share holders.. why? over the long terms they might go up in value but the share should produce a dividend and hopefully pay its own way in gains/tax etc. When have utd ever paid a dividend though? not so far on the NY stock market anyway. http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2012/08/10/manchester-united-ipo-history-says-dont-buy/ so if there's no real value in investing why does brand value matter? is it a means of ranking teams? is it for rich arabs to measure up?
Of course, as it is for any intangible asset until someone actually purchases the brand, which never happens (excepting slaes of whole businesses including the brand). The brand value is only a measure of how much extra revenue you would expect to make by using the brand. Like yourself, I would agree that shirt sales would be a decent (albeit incomplete) proxy. I would agree with those five based on my experiences, except maybe Chelsea instead of Liverpool or Bayern; I 've seen quite a few of those in the last couple of years. MU, Real and Barca definitely top 3 imo. Previously would have said AC Milan as well but they seem to have dropped off a bit.
that is a good point. shirt sponsorships would be a good indication of the standnig the day the deal as signed. eg. LFc to warrior is indicative of a team not in demand and LFc really used the american connection to secure a good deal over and above that the real brands would pay. that was 2 years ago for 6 years and was about 300mil all told. however utd went out this January to tender for their kitd deal with all the big boys vying to pay double that. Real madrid reputedly take 35million per year from adidas for thier kit and that is BIGGER than anyones. Bayern only get 20? http://www.tribalfootball.com/artic...madrid-no1-arsenal-biggest-mover-puma-4021951 I wouldn't put any faith in this link either but it is interesting to note. What things could germans and eastern europeans be buying to offset thsi massive differenc ein revenue??? Is it cos in spain tickets cost far less to games? ergo........... on brand how is bayrn worth more than real? i eman it seems very long deals are what the kits companies want, 9-10 year deals worth mega bucks... but as no clubs align measuring one v the other is very hard.
