Challenger Clubs vs The Big Six

I've been thinking about the "challenger clubs" like Villa, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, West Ham, Brighton.
They whinge that things aren't fair and that the big six are naughty cheats.
Obviously City and Cheatski are indeed cheats, but not LIV ARS MNU TOT.

I got the data from Wiki and AI so it will be a bit wrong, but the big clubs seems to match Deloitte.
I can see Sunderland is wrong... probably a lot are not correct as they will be drawn from the wrong years and from AI's furtive imagination.
But the point stands:

I sorted the data on turnover as that is super important. I added % of Spurs to show how far behind or ahead we are.

Note that Villa (67% of our turnover) are spending nearly all of that on wages, let alone anything else, where we spend around half our turnover on wages.
(I haven't gone into specifics because it varies with every transfer and qualification for Europe) and also Villa just lost some key players.

Then we have cheats Saudi Sportswashing Machine, who are losing some key players and only have 59% of our turnover.

Then Wet Spam who got relegated (YESSS!!!) and little Brighton with a third of our turnover.

A huge gulf developing, which is lovely to see. If we can kick AST and NEW and WHU and BRI down and down by taking their best players, we can really keep the gulf developing nicely.

PS Then you have all the annoying wannabes who think they can make their way up to challenge the big six... but can't. Their best players always leave.
Then you have the little brothers who act Billy Big Balls for a couple of seasons before they get relegated.
Just look at those percentages, lovely jubbly.

It's good for the game that Saudi Sportswashing Machine couldn't do a City or Chelsea.

Mosquito_Coasting said:

It's good for the game that Saudi Sportswashing Machine couldn't do a City or Chelsea.

Click to expand...

It’s good for the game that we have set what now seems to be the blueprint but the cost of building new stadiums has significantly increased since we built our’s. So now fewer clubs can afford to just build a new stadium knowing that future revenues will give the club a clear path forward.

I mean that’s good for us more than it is the game but hopefully will mitigate the risk for copycat clubs.

Had we stayed at White Hart Lane we’d still be a bigger club than Villa & Saudi Sportswashing Machine.

robp135 said:

Had we stayed at White Hart Lane we’d still be a bigger club than Villa & Saudi Sportswashing Machine.

Click to expand...

But we wouldn’t have anywhere near the spending power we have now and be bumping up against the same issues those clubs are facing

Gazza Dazzla said:

But we wouldn’t have anywhere near the spending power we have now and be bumping up against the same issues those clubs are facing

Click to expand...

Yep, and this year will be the first year with the additional non football events (increase that was approved).

If RDZ gets us back into CL, we will close/pass some of those above as well.

That gap between top 6 and rest is even worse when you look at it over a 5 year timeframe

Bullet said:

I've been thinking about the "challenger clubs" like Villa, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, West Ham, Brighton.
They whinge that things aren't fair and that the big six are naughty cheats.
Obviously City and Cheatski are indeed cheats, but not LIV ARS MNU TOT.

I got the data from Wiki and AI so it will be a bit wrong, but the big clubs seems to match Deloitte.
I can see Sunderland is wrong... probably a lot are not correct as they will be drawn from the wrong years and from AI's furtive imagination.
But the point stands:

I sorted the data on turnover as that is super important. I added % of Spurs to show how far behind or ahead we are.

Note that Villa (67% of our turnover) are spending nearly all of that on wages, let alone anything else, where we spend around half our turnover on wages.
(I haven't gone into specifics because it varies with every transfer and qualification for Europe) and also Villa just lost some key players.

Then we have cheats Saudi Sportswashing Machine, who are losing some key players and only have 59% of our turnover.

Then Wet Spam who got relegated (YESSS!!!) and little Brighton with a third of our turnover.

A huge gulf developing, which is lovely to see. If we can kick AST and NEW and WHU and BRI down and down by taking their best players, we can really keep the gulf developing nicely.

PS Then you have all the annoying wannabes who think they can make their way up to challenge the big six... but can't. Their best players always leave.
Then you have the little brothers who act Billy Big Balls for a couple of seasons before they get relegated.
Just look at those percentages, lovely jubbly.

View attachment 22921
View attachment 22922

Click to expand...

Thank you informative chart.

If Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine fans were charged anywhere near the tickets prices we Spurs fans pay for the same product i.e PL football those clubs would be able to compete on finances.
Spurs fans in football matchday income contribute 22% towards total revenue of the club far more in comparison than clubs like Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and even though there is some protest against our pricing our fans should be congratulated on the financial support we give to our club , our financial power is not entirely due to NFL/Concerts etc although it does help.

SirPercyHotspur said:

Thank you informative chart.

If Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine fans were charged anywhere near the tickets prices we Spurs fans pay for the same product i.e PL football those clubs would be able to compete on finances.
Spurs fans in football matchday income contribute 22% towards total revenue of the club far more in comparison than clubs like Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and even though there is some protest against our pricing our fans should be congratulated on the financial support we give to our club , our financial power is not entirely due to NFL/Concerts etc although it does help.


Ultimately, everyone decides for themselves how to invest their money in leisure and entertainment, and it’s important to take a thoughtful approach to spending. For example, when it comes to other hobbies, I always look for options with minimal risk: I was after online casinos with small deposit limits because I prefer testing things slowly. The guide at online casinos with small deposit limits was helpful because it didn’t just throw names at me; it explained what to compare. Minimums, payment options, and account terms all made more sense after reading it.

Click to expand...

Tottenham's financial success is largely due to the high ticket prices charged to its own fans, not just the entertainment shows.

Yanzi said:

Tottenham's financial success is largely due to the high ticket prices charged to its own fans, not just the entertainment shows.

Click to expand...

Ticket income is a lot of money but I believe it’s around 20 ish if the revenue
It’s everything else on top that helps

Interesting stuff. You might think that matchday income was a larger percent of a smaller pot, for smaller teams.
Of course this won't be accurate, but this is what Gemini says

Premier League Revenue Percentage Breakdown

Club Matchday % Commercial % Broadcasting %
MNU 24% 49% 27%
ARS 22% 30% 48%
TOT 21% 43% 36%
LIV 17% 46% 37%
CHE 15% 38% 47%
MNC 11% 49% 40%
AST 10% 26% 64%
NEW 12% 34% 54%
WHU 14% 25% 61%
BRI 8% 18% 74%
EVE 9% 21% 70%
FUL11% 21% 68%
CRY 8% 15% 77%
WOL 7% 20% 73%
BRE 6% 21% 73%
BOU 5% 15% 80%
NOT 6% 16% 78%
LEI 7% 19% 74%
IPS 9% 16% 75%
SOU 8% 17% 75%

SirPercyHotspur said:

Thank you informative chart.

If Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine fans were charged anywhere near the tickets prices we Spurs fans pay for the same product i.e PL football those clubs would be able to compete on finances.
Spurs fans in football matchday income contribute 22% towards total revenue of the club far more in comparison than clubs like Villa and Saudi Sportswashing Machine and even though there is some protest against our pricing our fans should be congratulated on the financial support we give to our club , our financial power is not entirely due to NFL/Concerts etc although it does help.

Click to expand...

Not really

- They can't, they have a location problem. Fulham charges similar (more in some scenarios) than us. London = more money
- They haven't got 18 years of European football revenue stacked in as well
- Both have older stadiums, which typically means while they may have seats (Saudi Sportswashing Machine), they don't have the corporate/hospitality facilities (even more expensive), not to mention stuff like us having bigger areas for food/drink.
- Then you have club store (think it's still largest in PL)

Spurs built revenue over years, with a real plan and multiple angles, it's not that simple (or cheap) to replicate. It's the off the pitch stuff that we did better than anyone in the league by a long distance, and it's the only reason we have a chance now to get it right on the pitch

Raziel said:

Yep, and this year will be the first year with the additional non football events (increase that was approved).

If RDZ gets us back into CL, we will close/pass some of those above as well.

That gap between top 6 and rest is even worse when you look at it over a 5 year timeframe

Click to expand...

I’ve been meaning to start a thread on this, because I’m interested in the debate.

I had assumed that ‘The other 14’ would actually look at Spurs as an example, and be happy for us to some degree that we built our financial power over the course of a decade plus, executing an extremely complex project, suffering in the short and mid term, and taking no outside money to do it. Is that actually the case? HELL NO! Villa fans in particular seem tinkled at us, and see no reason why we should be able to spend more, ‘just because you can host Beyonce’.

So my question is….do they have a point? My argument to them would be that this all shows that Spurs are actually a big club, that we built a big stadium and can actually fill it up despite high ticket prices. And that the added events around it are just smart business. And that I get their argument to some extent, but this isn’t American sports, there are no salary caps and no drafts. You choose to support a team, and in football, there is a pyramid and some teams are just bigger than others.

But I tried to put myself in Villa’s shoes. Do they have a point? Clearly they just want to be able to invest like Emirates Marketing Project and short cut a lot of the hard yards we had to get through. And they’re annoyed that they can’t. And they feel like because they’re not a London club, they can’t host events like we do, so they’re kind of stuck in that position having to sell their best players.

If you were a Villa and you wanted to ‘do a Tottenham’ and increase revenues sustainably and for the long term, how would you do it? Maybe the stadium project worked specifically for us because we are actually a big club with a lot of fans that are willing to pay to attend. But is there anything Villa can do? I’m sceptical of their London argument, as surely Birmingham provides enough opportunity for cultural events. And equally just being in London and having a bigger stadium hasn’t helped West Ham. So clearly there’s more to it than that.

But is there anything Villa can do? Or are they just destined to be trapped in this position and never truly able to progress like we have into a true big 6?

Bullet said:

Interesting stuff. You might think that matchday income was a larger percent of a smaller pot, for smaller teams.
Of course this won't be accurate, but this is what Gemini says

Premier League Revenue Percentage Breakdown

Club Matchday % Commercial % Broadcasting %
MNU 24% 49% 27%
ARS 22% 30% 48%
TOT 21% 43% 36%
LIV 17% 46% 37%
CHE 15% 38% 47%
MNC 11% 49% 40%
AST 10% 26% 64%
NEW 12% 34% 54%
WHU 14% 25% 61%
BRI 8% 18% 74%
EVE 9% 21% 70%
FUL11% 21% 68%
CRY 8% 15% 77%
WOL 7% 20% 73%
BRE 6% 21% 73%
BOU 5% 15% 80%
NOT 6% 16% 78%
LEI 7% 19% 74%
IPS 9% 16% 75%
SOU 8% 17% 75%

Click to expand...

I would always have assumed the exact opposite. Smaller stadiums and cheaper prices equated to a smaller percentage of the total. The reasonably equal payments from broadcasting in the PL have a much bigger impact on clubs with a lower turnover than they do on the the high turnover clubs.

In some ways our matchday is actually larger than stated as the revenue from the corp seats is classed as commercial revenue at Spurs. However, one could argue this is actually matchday.

SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:

I’ve been meaning to start a thread on this, because I’m interested in the debate.

I had assumed that ‘The other 14’ would actually look at Spurs as an example, and be happy for us to some degree that we built our financial power over the course of a decade plus, executing an extremely complex project, suffering in the short and mid term, and taking no outside money to do it. Is that actually the case? HELL NO! Villa fans in particular seem tinkled at us, and see no reason why we should be able to spend more, ‘just because you can host Beyonce’.

So my question is….do they have a point? My argument to them would be that this all shows that Spurs are actually a big club, that we built a big stadium and can actually fill it up despite high ticket prices. And that the added events around it are just smart business. And that I get their argument to some extent, but this isn’t American sports, there are no salary caps and no drafts. You choose to support a team, and in football, there is a pyramid and some teams are just bigger than others.

But I tried to put myself in Villa’s shoes. Do they have a point? Clearly they just want to be able to invest like Emirates Marketing Project and short cut a lot of the hard yards we had to get through. And they’re annoyed that they can’t. And they feel like because they’re not a London club, they can’t host events like we do, so they’re kind of stuck in that position having to sell their best players.

If you were a Villa and you wanted to ‘do a Tottenham’ and increase revenues sustainably and for the long term, how would you do it? Maybe the stadium project worked specifically for us because we are actually a big club with a lot of fans that are willing to pay to attend. But is there anything Villa can do? I’m sceptical of their London argument, as surely Birmingham provides enough opportunity for cultural events. And equally just being in London and having a bigger stadium hasn’t helped West Ham. So clearly there’s more to it than that.

But is there anything Villa can do? Or are they just destined to be trapped in this position and never truly able to progress like we have into a true big 6?

Click to expand...

So to answer your perspective

- If Villa is angry they can't do a Chelsea/City, they should be angry with the FA/PSR, not with Spurs, shows a childish perspective.
- It would be much harder for them or anyone to do what we did, interest rates now, supply chain problems, general UK economy means a project the scale of what we did would be exponentially harder. But again, you can't bitch that someone else's owners had more foresight, planning and execution than yours, then blame them for being in a better position (see point above)
- Hard to say anything is impossible, but I look at Leicester as a good example, poured money in, actually won a PL & FA cup (you would think success would help accelerate off field progress) yet were never even able to break into the West Ham, Villa, Southampton type tier of income.

No question some of the FFP/PSR/SCR rules were a bit of a ladder pull, protecting status quo, but it was obvious to see for years, yet really only we did anything to break that ceiling.

Raziel said:

So to answer your perspective

- If Villa is angry they can't do a Chelsea/City, they should be angry with the FA/PSR, not with Spurs, shows a childish perspective.
- It would be much harder for them or anyone to do what we did, interest rates now, supply chain problems, general UK economy means a project the scale of what we did would be exponentially harder. But again, you can't bitch that someone else's owners had more foresight, planning and execution than yours, then blame them for being in a better position (see point above)
- Hard to say anything is impossible, but I look at Leicester as a good example, poured money in, actually won a PL & FA cup (you would think success would help accelerate off field progress) yet were never even able to break into the West Ham, Villa, Southampton type tier of income.

No question some of the FFP/PSR/SCR rules were a bit of a ladder pull, protecting status quo, but it was obvious to see for years, yet really only we did anything to break that ceiling.

Click to expand...

Yeah, Villa fans are definitely mad at the regulations, but they seem to weirdly have reserved a special place of hatred for us, equating ‘hosting Beyonce’ with getting bought by oil money. Our version of being lucky is that we’re in London, and can host concerns and the boxing, apparently.

Quite why every other London team didn’t just figure this out is anyone’s guess.