|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on May 23, 2019 17:46:32 GMT 1
This last season's Sky brass. Slightly down on last year as I recall.
|
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on May 23, 2019 18:36:41 GMT 1
So you do get more money when you are shown live on tv.
Just over a million each time.
Not surprised at all we were on joint least though, I’m surprised Bournemouth were not on more often.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on May 23, 2019 19:20:41 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by impact on May 23, 2019 19:37:52 GMT 1
So you do get more money when you are shown live on tv. Just over a million each time. Not surprised at all we were on joint least though, I’m surprised Bournemouth were not on more often. It's a set amount of money, then money for every game over a certain number. Think it's 10. Every team gets paid for 10 even if they aren't on 10 times. |
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on May 23, 2019 19:48:23 GMT 1
So you do get more money when you are shown live on tv. Just over a million each time. Not surprised at all we were on joint least though, I’m surprised Bournemouth were not on more often. It's a set amount of money, then money for every game over a certain number. Think it's 10. Every team gets paid for 10 even if they aren't on 10 times. Yeah I thought the money was just split evenly 20 ways, no matter how many times you are on. My mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by NumeroUno on May 23, 2019 20:25:02 GMT 1
Income is down because..we're down. We finished lower this season than last and therefore missed out on £1.9m merit payments per place in the table.
Finishing one place higher and above Fulham, which could've been very achievable had we not been shocking, would've gotten us a more money than what we paid to buy Christopher Schindler.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyarea on May 23, 2019 20:33:53 GMT 1
Same money as last time. The difference is we finished 16th and got just under £106million.
Take a look at Brighton in the table finished 16th got just under £106Million.
|
|
Champers
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,422
|
Post by Champers on May 23, 2019 21:45:11 GMT 1
I calculate that we earned a little over £6M per point gained.
In contrast, Manchester City only earned a meagre £1.5M per point.
Who's laughing now, Sheik Mansour?
|
|
|
|
Post by space hardware on May 23, 2019 23:15:30 GMT 1
I calculate that we earned a little over £6M per point gained. In contrast, Manchester City only earned a meagre £1.5M per point. Who's laughing now, Sheik Mansour? Sheikh Mansour, probably 😁😁 |
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on May 24, 2019 7:28:53 GMT 1
Same money as last time. The difference is we finished 16th and got just under £106million. Take a look at Brighton in the table finished 16th got just under £106Million. Except BHA finished 17th. |
|
|
|
Post by terrier10 on May 24, 2019 7:30:55 GMT 1
I calculate that we earned a little over £6M per point gained. In contrast, Manchester City only earned a meagre £1.5M per point. Who's laughing now, Sheik Mansour? “Pounds per point” - That’s surely another new PL record 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by ilsonterrier on May 24, 2019 8:02:23 GMT 1
Don't things change with the international TV money from next season? Instead of it being an equal share the clubs that are "more attractive to the overseas market" get more money. In other words, the rich get even richer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on May 24, 2019 9:04:23 GMT 1
Don't things change with the international TV money from next season? Instead of it being an equal share the clubs that are "more attractive to the overseas market" get more money. In other words, the rich get even richer. The bigger clubs were definitely due to get a bigger cut of the foreign revenue. It's warranted in terms of they are who primarily attracting the foreign audience. Probably shortsighted though. Hopefully the self-serving twats eventually suffer, as the gulf widens and more and more games have one team parking the bus, which will inevitably reduce the interest in games. |
|
|
|
Post by Solihull Terrier on May 24, 2019 9:31:30 GMT 1
We were on TV 8 times, which was the joint least along with Southampton and Bournemouth.
|
|
|
|
Post by stinkypete on May 24, 2019 9:43:44 GMT 1
£96m and we’re still being told we’ll be lucky to keep hold of Grant!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on May 29, 2019 9:57:30 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by ilsonterrier on May 29, 2019 10:13:22 GMT 1
As a statistician there's some interesting things to take from those figures Bluedogs.
First of all I'm assuming that not all clubs have declared figures, otherwise there's a hell of a lot of clubs paid more than double their income on wages (particularly as the Scottish clubs are included on top of the 92 English clubs).
Secondly, Villa would really have been up the creek without a paddle if they hadn't got promoted, because their income still included parachute payments. On the other hand, Derby could be in a bit of a mess.
Scunthorpe's is high because they have very low income, rather than ridiculously high wages. However, that business model is clearly unsustainable, particularly as they will now be playing in League 2.
Finally. how do Birmingham keep getting away with paying these silly amounts?
|
|
|
|
Post by CaptainHart on May 29, 2019 10:21:55 GMT 1
As a statistician there's some interesting things to take from those figures Bluedogs. First of all I'm assuming that not all clubs have declared figures, otherwise there's a hell of a lot of clubs paid more than double their income on wages (particularly as the Scottish clubs are included on top of the 92 English clubs). Secondly, Villa would really have been up the creek without a paddle if they hadn't got promoted, because their income still included parachute payments. On the other hand, Derby could be in a bit of a mess. Scunthorpe's is high because they have very low income, rather than ridiculously high wages. However, that business model is clearly unsustainable, particularly as they will now be playing in League 2. Finally. how do Birmingham keep getting away with paying these silly amounts? Given that they were deducted points Brum aren't getting away with it. |
|
|
|
Post by ilsonterrier on May 29, 2019 10:57:02 GMT 1
As a statistician there's some interesting things to take from those figures Bluedogs. First of all I'm assuming that not all clubs have declared figures, otherwise there's a hell of a lot of clubs paid more than double their income on wages (particularly as the Scottish clubs are included on top of the 92 English clubs). Secondly, Villa would really have been up the creek without a paddle if they hadn't got promoted, because their income still included parachute payments. On the other hand, Derby could be in a bit of a mess. Scunthorpe's is high because they have very low income, rather than ridiculously high wages. However, that business model is clearly unsustainable, particularly as they will now be playing in League 2. Finally. how do Birmingham keep getting away with paying these silly amounts? Given that they were deducted points Brum aren't getting away with it. True - forgot about that! But they still only got a punishment that was never going to have a real effect - not enough points to see them relegated and there's no prize money for positions in the championship. Until they do something that really hits them properly they will keep doing it, and paying lip service to the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on May 29, 2019 11:04:00 GMT 1
Does this mean we can afford a few half decent players?  I think so. |
|
|
|
Post by Torquayterrier on May 29, 2019 11:06:05 GMT 1
Sobering reading for Ipswich supporters too, 108% and relegated. There must be some serious rebuilding to be done there for Lambert.
|
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on May 29, 2019 12:36:00 GMT 1
I think the figures are based on 2017/18 in the main. Shows how crazy the Championship is - 15 of the ‘top’ 20 are from that league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on May 29, 2019 13:58:52 GMT 1
I think the figures are based on 2017/18 in the main. Shows how crazy the Championship is - 15 of the ‘top’ 20 are from that league. They are, as confirmed by Price of Football who posted them on Twitter. |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on May 29, 2019 14:14:56 GMT 1
Forgive my ignorance but does that mean we were the second most profitable club in all 4 leagues behind Spurs? Surprised to see Brighton and Newcastle not far behind as I was under the impression their wage bill was way in excess of ours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on May 29, 2019 14:49:09 GMT 1
Forgive my ignorance but does that mean we were the second most profitable club in all 4 leagues behind Spurs? Surprised to see Brighton and Newcastle not far behind as I was under the impression their wage bill was way in excess of ours. The figures above only show wages against income and doesn't include transfer fees and other overheads. The table below shows operating profits/losses for each club, together with the total turnover. I can't find a table on net profits. Edit; Not sure how this reads on here but clicking the link and reading it on Twitter makes the table a bit clearer. |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on May 29, 2019 17:52:24 GMT 1
So I guess we're not skint then, that's a relief. A little troubling to read the rumours that Town have slashed their asking price for Mooy. Why sell your most influential player cut price if you dont have to? Stoke didn't sell Allen, West Brom hung on to a lot of their players.
Must admit to being a little worried by rumours like this together with the tone of Deans latest speech. Hoping that was an effort to keep a lid on expectation and stop the club being held to ransom rather than the club needing to slash costs to stay afloat post takeover. Seems to me there should be enough in the pot to retain/build a top quality championship team.
|
|
|
|
Post by terriersyndrome on May 29, 2019 18:24:20 GMT 1
So I guess we're not skint then, that's a relief. A little troubling to read the rumours that Town have slashed their asking price for Mooy. Why sell your most influential player cut price if you dont have to? Stoke didn't sell Allen, West Brom hung on to a lot of their players. Must admit to being a little worried by rumours like this together with the tone of Deans latest speech. Hoping that was an effort to keep a lid on expectation and stop the club being held to ransom rather than the club needing to slash costs to stay afloat post takeover. Seems to me there should be enough in the pot to retain/build a top quality championship team. The club have said they're in a healthy position financially & no fire sales. I don't know why people take media gossip as gospel but completely dismiss what the club have said. |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on May 29, 2019 22:35:02 GMT 1
So I guess we're not skint then, that's a relief. A little troubling to read the rumours that Town have slashed their asking price for Mooy. Why sell your most influential player cut price if you dont have to? Stoke didn't sell Allen, West Brom hung on to a lot of their players. Must admit to being a little worried by rumours like this together with the tone of Deans latest speech. Hoping that was an effort to keep a lid on expectation and stop the club being held to ransom rather than the club needing to slash costs to stay afloat post takeover. Seems to me there should be enough in the pot to retain/build a top quality championship team. The club have said they're in a healthy position financially & no fire sales. I don't know why people take media gossip as gospel but completely dismiss what the club have said. I guess you need to look at the motives on each side and make your own mind up. Make no mistake fans are rightly and understandably treated like mushrooms some of the time. Also the press print stories, some are baseless but a lot come from genuine intel from people who know. I’ll be disappointed if mooy goes for £15M due to the price and the fact that we should be building a team around him. |
|
