• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Deloitte Money League - up to 8th

spitshine said:
How are Bayern generating that kind of revenue without the same TV rights deal as PL clubs?
Click to expand...
They are the Manchester and Liverpool of the Bundesliga combined. They have fantastic merchandising and sponsorship deals in a country with a bigger population than the UK.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Fapatalk
 
Bishop said:
They are the Manchester and Liverpool of the Bundesliga combined. They have fantastic merchandising and sponsorship deals in a country with a bigger population than the UK.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

Yep but to make the difference up there sponsorship must be huge, also
Allianz are probably paying a fortune for the naming rights etc.
If there league was marketed as effective as the PL, they would be hitting a £1bn.
 
spitshine said:
Thanks, very interesting and the part where it states they've made a profit 27 years in a row is incredible or simply creative accounting.;)
Click to expand...
It must be nice to be THE big fish in a league where financial doping just doesn't happen. Probably something to do with the Bundesliga's strict regulations about ownership...something about the fans having a degree of control? Either way, I suppose Bayern get to hoover up whoever breaks through (usually at Dortmund!) without having to pay crazy transfer fees (most of the time) or crazy wages. Like ManU did in the late 90s, I guess.

Of course, Red Bull are challenging that model now. I gather they had to jump through many hoops to get RB Leipzig to work. I'm not exactly a fan of financial doping on principle, but shaking up a hegemony is seldom a bad thing.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
It’s because their owners by their sponsors
Sure Adidas for example own part of them
Click to expand...

They are majority owned (I believe) by their own sports club with minority ownership by Audi Allianz and Adidas.

FatBloke said:
It where financial doping just doesn't happen. Probably something to do with the Bundesliga's strict regulations about ownership...something about the fans having a degree of control? Either way, I suppose Bayern get to hoover up whoever breaks through (usually at Dortmund!) without having to pay crazy transfer fees (most of the time) or crazy wages. Like ManU did in the late 90s, I guess.

Of course, Red Bull are challenging that model now. I gather they had to jump through many hoops to get RB Leipzig to work. I'm not exactly a fan of financial doping on principle, but shaking up a hegemony is seldom a bad thing.
Click to expand...

German football teams follow the sports club model where the institution itself has special status as a community sports club. The result is they have to be owned at least 51% by the members of that sports club. This is what typically stops the Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project models because you simply can't just buy out a team and throw money at it.

RB Leipzig is a special case because they bought the playing rights (aka DFB membership) from a very low division team and then created a new club which then used those playing rights hence them being able to own that 51% themselves or in this case 100%.




Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Fapatalk
 
Bishop said:
They are majority owned (I believe) by their own sports club with minority ownership by Audi Allianz and Adidas.



German football teams follow the sports club model where the institution itself has special status as a community sports club. The result is they have to be owned at least 51% by the members of that sports club. This is what typically stops the Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project models because you simply can't just buy out a team and throw money at it.

RB Leipzig is a special case because they bought the playing rights (aka DFB membership) from a very low division team and then created a new club which then used those playing rights hence them being able to own that 51% themselves or in this case 400%.




Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...
Same as Wolfsburg VW and Bayer Leverkusen who aren’t fan owned
 
Boy, the Popguns' patrons aren't taking kindly to this latest financial report. Furious, therapeutic, essays popping up to cast blame on owner/management. Over on The Arseletic, they practically have to have Agony Aunt Amy Lawrence handing out hugs and hand holds after the volumes of verbosity spewed at the reports.

Tough times for the Tinsel Vincibles.
 
I remember a discussion I had with the author of the Swiss Ramble when he had made a statement about the likely increase in revenue for Spurs being £20 million per annum from the new stadium compared to WHL I can't remember his reasoning behind that number, although my suspicion was that it was plucked out of thin air, probably as a comfort blanket to try to grab onto to try to deny on the inevitability of our revenue surpassing theirs.
 
.
Bedfordspurs said:
It’s because their owners by their sponsors
Sure Adidas for example own part of them
Click to expand...

And on the subject of kit manufacturers our deal with Nike if I remember correctly is for around 15 years - £30m/season, which is below all our rivals by a distance. I think Woolwich are getting £45-50m per season.
Has Levy missed a trick here?
 
spitshine said:
.


And on the subject of kit manufacturers our deal with Nike if I remember correctly is for around 15 years - £30m/season, which is below all our rivals by a distance. I think Woolwich are getting £45-50m per season.
Has Levy missed a trick here?
Click to expand...
No
We have a unique deal according to Levy
Most clubs sell their fights in their entirety
I believe we have sold the manufacturing rights but we get paid a % on what’s sold on top
I don’t have that for a fact but it’s something that came up in the minutes of a Trust meeting
It’s a great deal of the club profile grows as it would bring in more and more revenue
 
Finney Is Back said:
I remember a discussion I had with the author of the Swiss Ramble when he had made a statement about the likely increase in revenue for Spurs being £20 million per annum from the new stadium compared to WHL I can't remember his reasoning behind that number, although my suspicion was that it was plucked out of thin air, probably as a comfort blanket to try to grab onto to try to deny on the inevitability of our revenue surpassing theirs.
Click to expand...
New stadium will bring in £50/£60m more minimum
 
spitshine said:
.


And on the subject of kit manufacturers our deal with Nike if I remember correctly is for around 15 years - £30m/season, which is below all our rivals by a distance. I think Woolwich are getting £45-50m per season.
Has Levy missed a trick here?
Click to expand...
:confused:

According to the Beeb our shirt deal with AIA is worth £40m pa over 8 years.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49110767

'It matches the reported £40m-a-year deal Chelsea signed in 2015 with Yokohama tyres.'
 
Great to see our commercial revenue surpass the scum. Commercial revenue is where United are so strong right, it is what sets them apart?

Was sacking Poch partly driven by a reality where our commercial revenue receipts will drop if we are not in the CL? Losing CL would not only hit us with a TV rights income loss from the competition but also in reduced fees from the likes of Audi - I suspect. Mourinho must be on some crazy bonus to retain CL. Anyone hazard a guess how much more he earns if he secures CL?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back