How do you know that the business plan isn't sound? City are 3 years into a 10 year plan. Is there anyone who thinks it just might be a little premature to start concluding now as to whether it'll end up financially viable or not? Or is it just me who is prepared to reserve judgement one way or the other?
- - - - - -
Year 1: £90m loss
Year 2: £121m loss (sub:£211m)
Year 3: Taking the fact wages were bigger than revenues and a £120m loss was made, we can assume other costs of the business ontop of wages = £120m or thereabouts. This year wages will have increased further with the addition of some big earners (Augero/Nasri/Clichy) and with only fringe players leaving (SWP/Boateng). Say net increase of £10m.
Income will be up from Europa & a better league finish (+£5m). Sponsor ship up (+£15m) and merchandise up (+£10m).
Transfer spending down by £40m compared to previous year...so i think we can expect another £50m loss, at least for the past year (sub £260m losses).
This equates to an average loss of £86m pa.
So 3 seasons into a 10 year plan we are looking at at least £260m losses.....for your business plan to work City will have to turn around massive losses to about £35m profits every year....thats an average turn around of £110m per season....SO for the next 7 seasons, City will need to decrease spending and increase revenue to the tune of £110m pa to have broken even over 10 years.
Good luck with that!
"fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k "
Prove this fact because most reports are much much higher...same for Toure & Aguero
"the fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k"
1. If you have several players on 180 odd a week, then arguing about the extra 12k sensationalism is a bit silly is it not. ***
2. If you could get the corroborated "facts" for all of these speculated players, then such nonsense would be nailed for good, would it not.
*** I am assuming (C)iteh have not suffered a worse version of the deal alleged at Chelsky - where Terry has T&Cs to ensure wage parity with the clubs' highest earner at all times.
Devonshire - we were always going to make losses in the first few years. That's already been discussed in this thread.
The biggest reason for the losses has been player acquisition. That's not going to continue anywhere near the rate it has done since 2008. Two reasons - one, the club has said precisely that. And two, the FFP.
The way I see it is a three-step process. 1) To break even. 2) To start posting profits. 3) To make up on the loss incurred since 2008. The 10 year plan that is put in place will require the first 2 steps to be obtained, year in year out. The third can be obtained in a myriad of ways. Not necesssarily by making a return on those losses within the next 7 years (the time-frame for that could be anything), or indeed could be returned by the increase in value of the club overall. I.e. the value to the owner of his business as a saleable asset.
What are the football plans ?? PL/CL winners by when ??
Securing incumbency at the CL piggie trough (which is Spurs short-term aim) ??
"the fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k"
The Independant and the Guardian booth quoted what appears to be a very definative amount, both those papers do have a modicum of a reputation to maintain unlike the Sun or Daily Mail.
Year 1: £90m loss
Year 2: £121m loss (sub:£211m)
Year 3: Taking the fact wages were bigger than revenues and a £120m loss was made, we can assume other costs of the business ontop of wages = £120m or thereabouts. This year wages will have increased further with the addition of some big earners (Augero/Nasri/Clichy) and with only fringe players leaving (SWP/Boateng). Say net increase of £10m.
--
Let me tell you something..
What do you think of total worth of City squad this year compare to last year..
apparently they are making losses but their total worth is growing year by year.
If you have several players on 180 odd a week, then arguing about the extra 12k sensationalism is a bit silly is it not
-------------------------
If people are plucking figures out of thin air and saying things like "City have a squad full of players earning £200k per week", then why shouldn't they be picked up on that?
I'm sure Spurs fans would pick someone up for saying that Spurs have a squad full of players earning, oh I don't know, £90k per week? £100k per week?
What are the football plans ??
-------------------
Total domination. Mwah ha ha ha haaaa.
"If people are plucking figures out of thin air and saying things like "City have a squad full of players earning £200k per week", then why shouldn't they be picked up on that?"
Damned if you, damned if you don't.
The reality is of course far from the nonsense.
But the reality I reckon also makes for some very uncomfortable reading too.
"I'm sure Spurs fans would pick someone up for saying that Spurs have a squad full of players earning, oh I don't know, £90k per week? £100k per week?"
You could not have picked a worse club to make the comparison with !!! +
Even when we have done the PL/CL double 10 yrs running, while the PLC is the dominion of Darth Levy, we will never need to speculate about this aspect.
Brought to you by the club whose fans went rabid at the word that 2m Peter was on 70k/wk. <wk>
With a wage bill of £150m you'll need incomes of at least £250m to break even.
Last revenues posted were half that so there will be losses for years to come despite growing incomes.
"Guardian & Independant" ...well you go ahead and believe the figure that suits your argument best....both those papers are guilty of making up stories in the transfer window frenzy...here's one..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/sep/29/robin-van-persie-carlos-tevez-manchester-city
and that even points at Tevez's wages being £250k a week
and here is the Independent staing carlos being fined 4 wks wages, around £800k (you do the maths).
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/pfa-back-carlos-tevez-over-appeal-2376662.html
The way I see it, top football clubs don't make enough money from playing football anyway. They get it from direct marketing (such as club merchandise, tours, hospitality packages), direct sponsorship (the shirt and stadium deals), indirect sponsors and advertising, club image rights and personnel image rights of the players and manager.
No, the owners are going to make more money off the redevelopment of the outlying areas. I've often wondered why it was us that got so lucky, but if you look at the area - acres of brownfield land which is practically worthless and no plans to do anything with it - it has plenty of development potential and I suspect it's this that they wanted, with the club's name being used to increase its value. But, of course, they needed to get the club a name first, hence the massive spending.
the amount of effort put in by you guys amazes me and it's been the same posters saying the same thing just different ways for the last two months or so
I admire your persistence but face facts you've said your piece which your entitled to put now it is a bit old hat, We know we've got money and we're spending the owners who after all said and done are multi billionaire business men (unlike the keyboard accountants on here) Have earn't there money and are spending it just as they please.
If the project after ten years isn't a success then run and jump back on the bandwagon until then I would say you just relax there's nothing we haven't heard before,,
One day the truth will out, until that day enjoy the football that we are producing which apart from a fool no one can deny is a joy to watch
"They get it from direct marketing (such as club merchandise, tours"
I have put this to the Chelsky mob about what effect this has had on the bottom line, for their proclaimed "massive fanbase worldwide" vs the seat-paying UK supporters.
I have yet to have any response, so I imagine it has no effect at all on the bottom line coffers. Perhaps because all those Chelsky shirts in SE Asia are knock-off copies and not club-sanctioned goods ...
"I admire your persistence but face facts you've said your piece which your entitled to put now it is a bit old hat"
<quote>
Browse: Football Premier League Manchester City Tottenham Hotspur
Players wages - the facts
by mancinicity (U7179)
27 October 201
</quote>
Another muppet caught in his own family drift net.
So, in conclusion -
City will spend £100m in every transfer window.
City will never sell any players or offload dead wood like Adebayour and Tevez.
All new players will automatically be given £200k a week contracts.
Young players like Suarez, Razak, Roman etc have no future and will be given away.
City's turnover will be pegged at 2009 levels of £121m despite the stadium and shirt deal, the income from CL football, higher PL and TV earnings and the raft of new sponorship deals signed like Mansion House.
Weeeeeee'reeeee Doooooooomed.
The 5 highest paid players in football today are in La Liga
...................................
Thats now true, Eto'o earns around £330k a week Yaya toure earns like £10m a year similar to rooney.
So in conclusion:
City will spend nothing on transfer in the next 7 years
They will sell off their unwanted players at top dollar because clubs have been queing around the stadium to by Tevez & Adebayor.
Players will not expect pay rises when they renegotiate contracts and the club will not allow them.
The young players will become global stars because they were part of a team with featured the likes of Nasri, De Yong, Dzeko, Johnson, Toure, Savic Koralov, Zabalete (total team cost £120m) that beat a rubbish weakened wolves side 5-2 in the Carling Cup.
City will be able to double or triple their income in the next 5 years to levels that exceed Manchester United and Real Mardid because City will have a golbla fan base as big if not bigger.
The future looks profitable!
Am not sure it is true, are there not a few oligarchs in Russia paying out gazillions and hasnt PSG's wage bill rocketed?
For those guessing regarding prize and tv money earnings, the information id freely available
PL
http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/fe/72/0,,12306~160510,00.pdf
CL
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Finance/01/66/11/07/1661107_DOWNLOAD.pdf
Europa
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Finance/01/66/11/25/1661125_DOWNLOAD.pdf
For those of you guessing on wages. Good luck!
*global*
(to correct just one of my many typos above)
"Am not sure it is true, are there not a few oligarchs in Russia paying out gazillions and hasnt PSG's wage bill rocketed?"
We hope so.
Spurs have Pav, and a sell-on bonus for Taarabt.
meant to say not instead of now
How did I know hafijur would be here...
They will sell off their unwanted players at top dollar because clubs have been queing around the stadium to by Tevez & Adebayor.
--------------
No but that's at least £350k a week off the wage bill for 2 players who have contributed nothing this season. RSC can be added to that list as well.
Sign in if you want to comment
Players wages - the facts
Page 10 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
posted on 27/10/11
How do you know that the business plan isn't sound? City are 3 years into a 10 year plan. Is there anyone who thinks it just might be a little premature to start concluding now as to whether it'll end up financially viable or not? Or is it just me who is prepared to reserve judgement one way or the other?
- - - - - -
Year 1: £90m loss
Year 2: £121m loss (sub:£211m)
Year 3: Taking the fact wages were bigger than revenues and a £120m loss was made, we can assume other costs of the business ontop of wages = £120m or thereabouts. This year wages will have increased further with the addition of some big earners (Augero/Nasri/Clichy) and with only fringe players leaving (SWP/Boateng). Say net increase of £10m.
Income will be up from Europa & a better league finish (+£5m). Sponsor ship up (+£15m) and merchandise up (+£10m).
Transfer spending down by £40m compared to previous year...so i think we can expect another £50m loss, at least for the past year (sub £260m losses).
This equates to an average loss of £86m pa.
So 3 seasons into a 10 year plan we are looking at at least £260m losses.....for your business plan to work City will have to turn around massive losses to about £35m profits every year....thats an average turn around of £110m per season....SO for the next 7 seasons, City will need to decrease spending and increase revenue to the tune of £110m pa to have broken even over 10 years.
Good luck with that!
posted on 27/10/11
"fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k "
Prove this fact because most reports are much much higher...same for Toure & Aguero
posted on 27/10/11
"the fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k"
1. If you have several players on 180 odd a week, then arguing about the extra 12k sensationalism is a bit silly is it not. ***
2. If you could get the corroborated "facts" for all of these speculated players, then such nonsense would be nailed for good, would it not.
*** I am assuming (C)iteh have not suffered a worse version of the deal alleged at Chelsky - where Terry has T&Cs to ensure wage parity with the clubs' highest earner at all times.
posted on 27/10/11
Devonshire - we were always going to make losses in the first few years. That's already been discussed in this thread.
The biggest reason for the losses has been player acquisition. That's not going to continue anywhere near the rate it has done since 2008. Two reasons - one, the club has said precisely that. And two, the FFP.
The way I see it is a three-step process. 1) To break even. 2) To start posting profits. 3) To make up on the loss incurred since 2008. The 10 year plan that is put in place will require the first 2 steps to be obtained, year in year out. The third can be obtained in a myriad of ways. Not necesssarily by making a return on those losses within the next 7 years (the time-frame for that could be anything), or indeed could be returned by the increase in value of the club overall. I.e. the value to the owner of his business as a saleable asset.
posted on 27/10/11
What are the football plans ?? PL/CL winners by when ??
Securing incumbency at the CL piggie trough (which is Spurs short-term aim) ??
posted on 27/10/11
"the fact is that Tevez is our highest paid player on £188k"
The Independant and the Guardian booth quoted what appears to be a very definative amount, both those papers do have a modicum of a reputation to maintain unlike the Sun or Daily Mail.
posted on 27/10/11
Year 1: £90m loss
Year 2: £121m loss (sub:£211m)
Year 3: Taking the fact wages were bigger than revenues and a £120m loss was made, we can assume other costs of the business ontop of wages = £120m or thereabouts. This year wages will have increased further with the addition of some big earners (Augero/Nasri/Clichy) and with only fringe players leaving (SWP/Boateng). Say net increase of £10m.
--
Let me tell you something..
What do you think of total worth of City squad this year compare to last year..
apparently they are making losses but their total worth is growing year by year.
posted on 27/10/11
If you have several players on 180 odd a week, then arguing about the extra 12k sensationalism is a bit silly is it not
-------------------------
If people are plucking figures out of thin air and saying things like "City have a squad full of players earning £200k per week", then why shouldn't they be picked up on that?
I'm sure Spurs fans would pick someone up for saying that Spurs have a squad full of players earning, oh I don't know, £90k per week? £100k per week?
posted on 27/10/11
What are the football plans ??
-------------------
Total domination. Mwah ha ha ha haaaa.
posted on 27/10/11
"If people are plucking figures out of thin air and saying things like "City have a squad full of players earning £200k per week", then why shouldn't they be picked up on that?"
Damned if you, damned if you don't.
The reality is of course far from the nonsense.
But the reality I reckon also makes for some very uncomfortable reading too.
"I'm sure Spurs fans would pick someone up for saying that Spurs have a squad full of players earning, oh I don't know, £90k per week? £100k per week?"
You could not have picked a worse club to make the comparison with !!! +
Even when we have done the PL/CL double 10 yrs running, while the PLC is the dominion of Darth Levy, we will never need to speculate about this aspect.
Brought to you by the club whose fans went rabid at the word that 2m Peter was on 70k/wk. <wk>
posted on 27/10/11
With a wage bill of £150m you'll need incomes of at least £250m to break even.
Last revenues posted were half that so there will be losses for years to come despite growing incomes.
"Guardian & Independant" ...well you go ahead and believe the figure that suits your argument best....both those papers are guilty of making up stories in the transfer window frenzy...here's one..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/sep/29/robin-van-persie-carlos-tevez-manchester-city
and that even points at Tevez's wages being £250k a week
and here is the Independent staing carlos being fined 4 wks wages, around £800k (you do the maths).
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/pfa-back-carlos-tevez-over-appeal-2376662.html
posted on 27/10/11
The way I see it, top football clubs don't make enough money from playing football anyway. They get it from direct marketing (such as club merchandise, tours, hospitality packages), direct sponsorship (the shirt and stadium deals), indirect sponsors and advertising, club image rights and personnel image rights of the players and manager.
No, the owners are going to make more money off the redevelopment of the outlying areas. I've often wondered why it was us that got so lucky, but if you look at the area - acres of brownfield land which is practically worthless and no plans to do anything with it - it has plenty of development potential and I suspect it's this that they wanted, with the club's name being used to increase its value. But, of course, they needed to get the club a name first, hence the massive spending.
posted on 27/10/11
the amount of effort put in by you guys amazes me and it's been the same posters saying the same thing just different ways for the last two months or so
I admire your persistence but face facts you've said your piece which your entitled to put now it is a bit old hat, We know we've got money and we're spending the owners who after all said and done are multi billionaire business men (unlike the keyboard accountants on here) Have earn't there money and are spending it just as they please.
If the project after ten years isn't a success then run and jump back on the bandwagon until then I would say you just relax there's nothing we haven't heard before,,
One day the truth will out, until that day enjoy the football that we are producing which apart from a fool no one can deny is a joy to watch
posted on 27/10/11
"They get it from direct marketing (such as club merchandise, tours"
I have put this to the Chelsky mob about what effect this has had on the bottom line, for their proclaimed "massive fanbase worldwide" vs the seat-paying UK supporters.
I have yet to have any response, so I imagine it has no effect at all on the bottom line coffers. Perhaps because all those Chelsky shirts in SE Asia are knock-off copies and not club-sanctioned goods ...
posted on 27/10/11
"I admire your persistence but face facts you've said your piece which your entitled to put now it is a bit old hat"
<quote>
Browse: Football Premier League Manchester City Tottenham Hotspur
Players wages - the facts
by mancinicity (U7179)
27 October 201
</quote>
Another muppet caught in his own family drift net.
posted on 27/10/11
So, in conclusion -
City will spend £100m in every transfer window.
City will never sell any players or offload dead wood like Adebayour and Tevez.
All new players will automatically be given £200k a week contracts.
Young players like Suarez, Razak, Roman etc have no future and will be given away.
City's turnover will be pegged at 2009 levels of £121m despite the stadium and shirt deal, the income from CL football, higher PL and TV earnings and the raft of new sponorship deals signed like Mansion House.
Weeeeeee'reeeee Doooooooomed.
posted on 27/10/11
The 5 highest paid players in football today are in La Liga
...................................
Thats now true, Eto'o earns around £330k a week Yaya toure earns like £10m a year similar to rooney.
posted on 27/10/11
So in conclusion:
City will spend nothing on transfer in the next 7 years
They will sell off their unwanted players at top dollar because clubs have been queing around the stadium to by Tevez & Adebayor.
Players will not expect pay rises when they renegotiate contracts and the club will not allow them.
The young players will become global stars because they were part of a team with featured the likes of Nasri, De Yong, Dzeko, Johnson, Toure, Savic Koralov, Zabalete (total team cost £120m) that beat a rubbish weakened wolves side 5-2 in the Carling Cup.
City will be able to double or triple their income in the next 5 years to levels that exceed Manchester United and Real Mardid because City will have a golbla fan base as big if not bigger.
The future looks profitable!
posted on 27/10/11
Am not sure it is true, are there not a few oligarchs in Russia paying out gazillions and hasnt PSG's wage bill rocketed?
posted on 27/10/11
For those guessing regarding prize and tv money earnings, the information id freely available
PL
http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/fe/72/0,,12306~160510,00.pdf
CL
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Finance/01/66/11/07/1661107_DOWNLOAD.pdf
Europa
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Finance/01/66/11/25/1661125_DOWNLOAD.pdf
For those of you guessing on wages. Good luck!
posted on 27/10/11
*global*
(to correct just one of my many typos above)
posted on 27/10/11
"Am not sure it is true, are there not a few oligarchs in Russia paying out gazillions and hasnt PSG's wage bill rocketed?"
We hope so.
Spurs have Pav, and a sell-on bonus for Taarabt.
posted on 27/10/11
meant to say not instead of now
posted on 27/10/11
How did I know hafijur would be here...
posted on 27/10/11
They will sell off their unwanted players at top dollar because clubs have been queing around the stadium to by Tevez & Adebayor.
--------------
No but that's at least £350k a week off the wage bill for 2 players who have contributed nothing this season. RSC can be added to that list as well.
Page 10 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14