Champions League qualification is worth £85m

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
136,902
Location
Hollywood CA
Mark Critchley of the Athletic published a good article about the importance of CL qualification a couple of days ago.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6266306/2025/04/17/cost-manchester-united-europa-league-exit/



In summary: The Athletic are suggesting United will collect as much as £85m by qualifying for the CL, and break down all the different revenue streams involved.

It also lists United's previous annual European earnings over the preceding decade.

oVwgpw3.png

As well as an illustration of how the club's profitability has gone south in recent years.
7I0kzda.png

------------------------------------
 
I'm guessing this is the only reason the Glazers sold a stake. They'd well and truly ran the club into the ground
 
It would have beeen nicer to know the full consequences of not winning the Europa League final after we've won it.

Basically we have to win it, or it's going to be very grim.
 
It’s the difference between the window we want, and probably selling Mainoo or Garnacho to fund a lesser one.
 
It's imperative for the club to win I also think it gets the current and newer players to buy into the managers idea. Quenda (reportedly) chose Chelsea as he wasn't intent on playing wingback so I don't think we can overlook the appeal winning the cup and qualification in the UCL has on the upcoming season in relation to signing players.
 
Doesn’t our wage bill increase too if we do as players will be back at their Champions League salary levels? I believe they are taking reduced salaries this year. It’ll also be more difficult for us to shift the likes of Rashford and Sancho when they can see that all they have to do is stick around for another year and earn a few million extra quids compared to anywhere else.
 
2 man midfield said:
It’s the difference between the window we want, and probably selling Mainoo or Garnacho to fund a lesser one.
Click to expand...

It would at a minimum cover the annual payments Ratcliffe referenced during the Neville interview - Sancho, Casemiro, Hojlund, Onana etc., and allow us to buy the best striker available. Maybe even something resembling Gyokeres and Cherki or a similar combination.
 
Which makes our January transfer window even more puzzling. We should have gotten a forward in or kept one of our existing ones. Last night we had no forwards on the pitch when we needed to score two goals.
 
Think it used to be around £35-40m so it's gone up quite a bit?
 
redshaw said:
Think it used to be around £35-40m so it's gone up quite a bit?
Click to expand...

They're including revenue earned by all the CL home games as well. There would be at least 4 at OT, which are worth £21m - which could rise depending on how many subsequent home fixtures take place as United progress.
 
If all the players currently have the 25% reduction in wages for not qualifying for the Champions League then we could be looking at a £57 million increase in the wage bill next season.
 
Poorly written article. Mixes up currencies throughout (expresses some figures in pounds and others in Euro) and conflates revenue with earnings.

Sports journalists are innumerate.
 
You only need to look at the viewing figures on youtube from last night (about to hit 3m for TNT's upload) and then compare it to City vs Real two legger this year in the CL (TNT's uploads are 3.2m combined) to understand the scale of how powerful we should be financially. That's Real, admittedly City have a much smaller fan base, but we're in the Europa and playing bloody Lyon.
 
That's why I thought Ineos's stinginess cost us by letting Rashford go and not getting a replacement. It worked this time, but we should not have to rely on Harry Maguire up front all the time to score when we are behind. The fact that we are one of the most expensive teams in the world and have 0 forwards on the bench is an issue. You skimp on money and can end up losing money elsewhere.
 
KeanoMagicHat said:
That's why I thought Ineos's stinginess cost us by letting Rashford go and not getting a replacement. It worked this time, but we should not have to rely on Harry Maguire up front all the time to score when we are behind. The fact that we are one of the most expensive teams in the world and have 0 forwards on the bench is an issue. You skimp on money and can end up losing money elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a very valid point
 
Not important. We’ve spunked 1 billion and got nowhere. I bet we’d be better for it in the long run if we had some short term financial restrictions. Be forced to actually think strategically. Yes I do almost believe this.
 
Offside said:
Not important. We’ve spunked 1 billion and got nowhere. I bet we’d be better for it in the long run if we had some short term financial restrictions. Be forced to actually think strategically. Yes I do almost believe this.
Click to expand...

There's no risk of saying this as a fan, but the club will no doubt want as much money as possible to fund better players.
 
I do think that it’s kind of mad that we have no forward options on the bench and have to rely on Hulk Hojlund for goals it’s dire. The possible financial implications appear to be significant which shows the risk we have taken, hopefully it pays off.
 
Lennon7 said:
Not forgetting Spurs have beaten us three times this season too
Click to expand...
They have but there the biggest bottlers ever when it comes to winning silverware. Plus they’ve just had the easiest route ever to the final.
 
Raoul said:
Mark Critchley of the Athletic published a good article about the importance of CL qualification a couple of days ago.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6266306/2025/04/17/cost-manchester-united-europa-league-exit/



In summary: The Athletic are suggesting United will collect as much as £85m by qualifying for the CL, and break down all the different revenue streams involved.

It also lists United's previous annual European earnings over the preceding decade.

oVwgpw3.png

As well as an illustration of how the club's profitability has gone south in recent years.
7I0kzda.png

------------------------------------
Click to expand...

There’s the answer to anyone who thinks a season without European football would be a good thing
 
When I say these things people don't listen. Also I made the point earlier that United 'lost" anywhere between 500m and 1bn by simply not being perennial CL quarterfinalists.
 
The Hilton said:
Yeah Spurs are tailor made to beat us, huge pace and physicality that we can't cope with
Click to expand...

I think they have ran out of steam even more than we have and no matter how poor we have been, I'd bet good money on us turning up in a final more than Spurs.
 
Offside said:
Not important. We’ve spunked 1 billion and got nowhere. I bet we’d be better for it in the long run if we had some short term financial restrictions. Be forced to actually think strategically. Yes I do almost believe this.
Click to expand...
Problem is we haven`t had real football people in charge of these type of decisions for ages. These jokers have pissed away so much of the clubs money i am baffled more questions haven`t been asked. Now, we do have some people in charge that are actually qualified for the jobs they do. So money spent now actually has a chance of improving us.
 
Gordon S said:
Problem is we haven`t had real football people in charge of these type of decisions for ages. These jokers have pissed away so much of the clubs money i am baffled more questions haven`t been asked. Now, we do have some people in charge that are actually qualified for the jobs they do. So money spent now actually has a chance of improving us.
Click to expand...

How many posts until someone responds to you and says something about Dorgu not being great so far (they won't say it this kindly).
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Poorly written article. Mixes up currencies throughout (expresses some figures in pounds and others in Euro) and conflates revenue with earnings.

Sports journalists are innumerate.
Click to expand...
Out of interest, what would be your number?
tomaldinho1 said:
You only need to look at the viewing figures on youtube from last night (about to hit 3m for TNT's upload) and then compare it to City vs Real two legger this year in the CL (TNT's uploads are 3.2m combined) to understand the scale of how powerful we should be financially. That's Real, admittedly City have a much smaller fan base, but we're in the Europa and playing bloody Lyon.
Click to expand...
There isn't an infinite amount of football to be played during the week and I am sure the word that this was a particularly crazy game went out quite quickly. No doubt, Uniteds fan base is big though.
Offside said:
Not important. We’ve spunked 1 billion and got nowhere. I bet we’d be better for it in the long run if we had some short term financial restrictions. Be forced to actually think strategically. Yes I do almost believe this.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Obviously bringing in this money would be better than not bringing it in but you get the impression that people think that all our earnings go directly into the player stock which couldn't be further from the truth. Of course we have to try to win this thing because it is an achievable trophy and none of the other teams is obviously a better team but I get the feeling that this is just another boom-bust-cycle building up. We spent crazy amounts in the last year. Didn't make us a great team. Brought in big names despite not being in the CL.

EL victory or not, we will be able to afford more than good enough wages to be attractive for players, the way more deciding factor will be the attractivity of the project and that took a big hit this season (after not looking good since years) and a European cup isn't going to sway players that have consultants worth their money.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
I think they have ran out of steam even more than we have and no matter how poor we have been, I'd bet good money on us turning up in a final more than Spurs.
Click to expand...

I just think they have us too badly outmatched physically, they have huge amounts of pace all over the pitch, it'll be easy for them to camp in our half, and either win the ball high pressing or win it back when their defenders easily outpace our forwards.
 
NZT-One said:
Out of interest, what would be your number?
Click to expand...
My issue isn't with the £85m - as far as I'm aware, that's an accurate representation of the incremental revenue we'd get from qualifying for the CL.

My nitpick is that the writer should've stuck with one currency consistently throughout, and shouldn't have shifted from discussing revenue to discussing profitability without at some point bringing up what the incremental profit would be (some fraction of the £85m).
 
The Hilton said:
I just think they have us too badly outmatched physically, they have huge amounts of pace all over the pitch, it'll be easy for them to camp in our half, and either win the ball high pressing or win it back when their defenders easily outpace our forwards.
Click to expand...

I think with both sides it honestly just depends on who shows up on the day. They haven't got more pace or physicality than Arsenal or Liverpool and we showed that we can stand up to them. It's just a matter of if we show up.

Maybe I'm believing in voodoo but I just think if we get to the final we will find a way to win regardless. To me our biggest hurdle by a mile is she Semi's.
 
The Hilton said:
I just think they have us too badly outmatched physically, they have huge amounts of pace all over the pitch, it'll be easy for them to camp in our half, and either win the ball high pressing or win it back when their defenders easily outpace our forwards.
Click to expand...
Thought they were fortunate to beat us last time (had chances) and ridiculous red card ruined first game.

Not saying they don’t have a chance but think we’re a better side than we were a couple/few months ago. And got a lot more depth (bar 9) now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.