I’d love it if City were actually first instead of second on the money list. Them being behind us helps to hide them a little bit. If they claimed they were making the most money in the PL, I think it will make it obviously ridiculous to claim they make more than us.
Revenue growth for Top 6 Premier League teams over the past decade
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
Not in a million years if all the angry ones read three or four posts above they'd see where I blatantly said ours was not legit, but you know the internet.... I was just using that post to congratulate Spurs on doing so well off the pitch while constantly shitting themselves on it.not even you can really believe that.
Yup that's what it took while we did it. If the worlds greatest chairman opened the purse strings you'd know exactly how it feels but hell you have the worlds greatest stadium where your fans can continue to racially abuse and sing
anti-semitic songs about themselves so its all good for both of us.
We won few enough which is why I'd gladly sell our soul a billion more times for a repeat of the last 10 years.
Your 3rd point has nothing to do with anything but if you just read a few lines of the thread you'd see I know we're not legit, I just don't care. If we're punished we're punished and rightly so, if not well tough shit for everyone else tbh...
Until Uefa/PL can prove sponsorships are bogus there is nothing that can be done. Other than that its purely broadcasting money. Without the commercial increase we'd probably be around 250-300% or so.How City earn that much?
Legally i mean...
To be fair the vast majority of that 230% comes from increased TV income. I think Burnley made like 115m or so from TV last year - that alone would've been a 200% rise from your 2008 figure.
I'm not having that. Our home is the Emptihad and the Sheikh buys 5,000 tickets per game to help us pass FFP.
Can we please stay consistent and on message in the City fan banter please.
That's near 0% interest rates at work. A low of that growth is inflationary fluff.
We're seeing the clash of two classic growth models I suppose, City's equity financing vs. Spurs' debt financing.
Reminder our revenue expected to reach £630m according to Woodward's safe estimation without a round of 16 and quarter-final and a clause for top trophies like EPL and UCL. We have Aon and Chevrolet sponsorship deals expiring in 2021 at the end of the season, it's worth around £70m in total, I can see us to increase our sponsorship value in 2021.
This is crazy if you ask me.
This is crazy if you ask me.
Since when did equity=bogus?
It was tongue in cheek...
Although given the Footy Leaks emails, bogus equity is actually quite an apt description.
Hard to disagree with any of this, to be honest.
This can't be emphasized enough. The amount of people who belittle one of the best Spurs sides in years, who could well have won a title in another generation if they didn't have to compete with four financial juggernauts and a doped up league, but say things like "fair play to City, they look class" is baffling. I'll especially never understand United fans that think like this.
Can't imagine the tough negotiations that City's executives had to do to get better commercial deals. Must be tough.
That's not really true, is it? The 1.3bn that Abu Dhabi have admitted pumping into City would be akin to equity financing, but none of that touches on the dubious commercial transactions that have artificially inflated City's income. It would be more correct to say that's the difference between cheating and debt financing.
According to the football leaks releases, City executives independently decide the value of commercial deals and, if they need more from their commercial deals in order to meet FFP, they can simply increase the value of those deals and backdate the increases.
As above, my post was tongue in cheek.
Without FFP, I think that yes it would all have been equity financing from ADUG to establish City as a top team. However, FFP restricted equity financing, so to make up the gap inflated commercial sponsorships were signed with Abu Dhabi based companies. Obviously City's commercial revenue in the OP is significantly higher than it should be, given our current size. I don't think anyone would sensibly dispute that.
Considering the fact they are a tiny club with the second largest income I'd still ridiculously obvious.
Gazidis was much more damaging to Arsenal than Wenger overstaying. Just getting him to leave finally makes it a good year for Arsenal.