Football's Magic Money Tree

[Chester Perry]

More on that UEFA report into the wealthiest clubs - UEFA are expecting that Liverpool will become the first club ever to announce a net profit of over 100m Euro in their next accounts to be published in the coming weeks - they will hold the record previously held by Tottenham then Leicester. In all three instances the bottom line was significantly assisted by progressing deep into the Champions League when not having been in the competition the previous year.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... et-profit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

It is Deloitte time again - with Spain regaining the top two places in the money league - whilst the Premier League becomes the first to have six in the top ten and even poor little Newcastle Utd make the top 20 with £178.5m - make them 8th on the Premier League List

https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/s ... eague.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ney-league" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/footbal ... spartanntp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Royboyclaret]

So, 9 PL clubs in the top twenty to Jun'18. Yet more evidence of how financially strong the PL is in comparison to other European Leagues.

Just as well that we don't feature in the top 20 in that Deloitte, nor any other organisation for that matter, will have access to our figure for that period. Except that is for the Burnley Board of Directors.

For what it's worth, £140 million remains a fair estimate, with the £119 million TV Revenue being the key element.

But we'll have to wait several more weeks for confirmation of that figure from the Club.

[aggi]

So, 9 PL clubs in the top twenty to Jun'18. Yet more evidence of how financially strong the PL is in comparison to other European Leagues.

Just as well that we don't feature in the top 20 in that Deloitte, nor any other organisation for that matter, will have access to our figure for that period. Except that is for the Burnley Board of Directors.

For what it's worth, £140 million remains a fair estimate, with the £119 million TV Revenue being the key element.

But we'll have to wait several more weeks for confirmation of that figure from the Club.

I assume it's compiled using estimates. Barely any of the Premier League clubs, apart from those which legally had to, have filed their accounts for 2018 yet. None of Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool or Chelsea have filed for instance and they're all shown in the top 10.

[Royboyclaret]

I assume it's compiled using estimates. Barely any of the Premier League clubs, apart from those which legally had to, have filed their accounts for 2018 yet. None of Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool or Chelsea have filed for instance and they're all shown in the top 10.

Struggling a bit with that, aggi. I'm sure we've seen, even on this thread, confirmation of the Turnover of most of our top six.

In any case, if Deloitte are using estmates, it makes it all a bit of a pointless exercise.

[Chester Perry]

There is another 4 in the next 10 - making 13 of the top 24 or 13 of the top 30

Pos. Club Revenue €m

21. SSC Napoli 182.8
22. Leicester City 179.4
23. Southampton 172.0
24. Crystal Palace 169.0
25. FC Zenit St Petersburg 167.8
26. Beşiktaş 165.7
27. Sevilla 165.2
28. Olympique Lyonnais 164.2
29. Brighton & Hove Albion 157.4
30. S.L. Benfica 150.7

Deloitie have previously claimed to have had sight of advance filings of financial results before they are submitted to local tax and regulatory authorities. - Though if Royboy has his sums right (I personally think he is on the mark) our financial results last season would have us in there too at the expense of Benfica, who truly are a big club

[Chester Perry]

With all these Premier League clubs earning such high revenues it is inevitable that a sizeable proportion goes to the players (and agents unfortunately) - one beneficiary though is HMRC - a new reports suggests that Premier League players payed over £1.1billion in tax in the 16-17 season - with over £3.3billion by the 20 clubs overall - ouch!!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46985178" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The full report outlining the economic impact of the Premier League

https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAsse ... League.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[aggi]

Struggling a bit with that, aggi. I'm sure we've seen, even on this thread, confirmation of the Turnover of most of our top six.

In any case, if Deloitte are using estmates, it makes it all a bit of a pointless exercise.

Actually, I think a few such as Man Utd may have filed overseas. Others haven't, particularly going down to Newcastle and the like.

[Royboyclaret]

Our comparison with Newcastle and the Deloitte report is an interesting one. They are 19th with a Total Revenue of £201.5m and yet they finished 10th compared to our 7th.

We received £119m in TV Revenue for that 7th position so, based on £1.9m per position, Newcastle's comparable figure would have been around £113m. Therefore in "other" Revenue (match receipts, sponsorship etc.) their figure would leave ours trailing in it's wake.

Shows just how far behind we are, in that respect, compared to most other PL clubs.

[Chester Perry]

Roy the Deloitte report talks in Euros so while Newcastle definitely earn a lot more than us in Matchday (52k crowds average against our 21k) and sponsorship it is closer to £35-40m more than £60-70m. They also get the benefit of being shown live on TV significantly more than us

unfortunately we are that far behind - small club, small town much less Premier League history than the Geordies who even made Champions League in that era as well as signing global names like Shearer and Owen in their mid 20's. Mick Garlick said last season he thought we could grow the commercial side more and I am sure the current Shirt sponsor is paying a fair bit more than the previous one, let alone the sleeves and that awfl red logo on the cricketfield stand

[aggi]

Our comparison with Newcastle and the Deloitte report is an interesting one. They are 19th with a Total Revenue of £201.5m and yet they finished 10th compared to our 7th.

We received £119m in TV Revenue for that 7th position so, based on £1.9m per position, Newcastle's comparable figure would have been around £113m. Therefore in "other" Revenue (match receipts, sponsorship etc.) their figure would leave ours trailing in it's wake.

Shows just how far behind we are, in that respect, compared to most other PL clubs.

I looked at this the other day. Newcastle's additional turnover (matchday/commercial) is about £35m compared to us.

[Chester Perry]

Roy - Newcastle got £4million more from tv than us last season as a result of their live games

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44150831" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Royboyclaret]

Roy - Newcastle got £4million more from tv than us last season as a result of their live games

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44150831" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Right, 18 live games compared to our 10.

Interestingly (posts#87 & #88 on this thread), we had exactly the same debate at this time last year regarding the authenticity of the Deloitte figures. Aggi makes the fair point that many Clubs' results have yet to be revealed at this time of year.

[Chester Perry]

posted before about the effects of the red button deal in the EFL - When Saturday comes has an article about the damaging effects on mid-week attendances (you can bet the Premier League are watching with interest. Mad fact - The Championship is currently the 3rd best attended League in European football - wow

https://www.wsc.co.uk/stories/14183-edi ... terference" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

If you look back at post 436 you will see how much Man City have made recently from selling youth team products - well we can add another £11m to that

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... r-british/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems like the Germans are banking on making money out of the Premier League (the De Bruyne. Pogba and Salah model) - by milking their talent factories - with full knowledge that competition is so intense and financial power so high that when players become first team ready they will make a vast profit on them.

[Chester Perry]

More detail on Man City's revenue earning youth set-up - believed by some to be a step forward on the Chelsea approach and now bring in a significant revenue. Telegraph article behind a paywall so pasted in full

Manchester City continue to reap rich dividends from youth set-up

It cost Manchester City £500,000 to sign Rabbi Matondo from Cardiff City almost three years ago, and when he finally left them on Wednesday for Schalke for a fee of around £11.29million he represented one of the best value deals the club has ever done.

Of course, there will always be the concern that Matondo, an 18-year-old of electrifying pace who, has played for his country, Wales, but never City’s first team could develop into one of Europe’s leading players, which is why a buy-back clause has been included. He is not considered as big a loss as his friend Jadon Sancho who departed for Borussia Dortmund in 2017 for £8million, although City believe that there are others coming who might be comparable.

Most of all, Matondo, bought as a 16-year-old - coached, educated, paid as a professional and finally departed - has earned the club a profit, the latest product of an academy that for at least five years has paid for itself. A huge scouting, acquisition and development organisation that earns revenue that is Financial Fair Play clean. And there could be more if Denis Suarez eventually joins Arsenal permanently from Barcelona: as a City academy boy his former club would be due a percentage of any sale.

City have been at the elite end of development for long enough that there are graduates of theirs circulating in European football who are earning their club fees and a lot more to come. While Chelsea developed the modern concept of the FFP-cash generating trading system, it is City who have refined it.

This window alone, the sales of Matondo and Brahim Diaz have earned the club around £26million. Sancho’s sale was £8million with a ten per cent sell-on fee added as standard. Last summer the Spanish full-backs Pablo Maffeo and Angelino were sold to Stuttgart for €10million, and to PSV Eindhoven for €5million respectively. Goalkeeper Angus Gunn went to Southampton for £13.5million and Jacob Davenport joined Blackburn for around £1million.

There have been many more, including Olivier Ntcham the French midfielder sold by City to Celtic 18 months ago for £4.5million. Enes Unal a Turkish striker who went to Villarreal for £12million at the same time. Kelechi Iheanacho, a £25million sale to Leicester City. The Belgian defender Jason Denayer to Lyon for around £5million. City tend not to keep any player not in their first team squad beyond the first year of his first professional deal: it is either loan or sale and the cycle starts again.

As with Sancho, they would have given Matondo a new contract but with the new interest from the Bundesliga there is an acceptance that keeping them all is simply impossible. What matters is the scale of the operation. There are so many good players that some will get through, others will refuse to re-sign and some will not be good enough. But in each there case there is profit. It was the approach adopted by Barcelona in the early part of the last decade when they were able to absorb the loss of many academy players because of the volume and quality of their production line.
Sancho’s departure was a cause for regret and left Phil Foden and Ian Carlo Poveda, who played 90 minutes against Burton Albion recently, as the leading hopes from the Under-19 age group. In Matondo’s cohort are Felix Nmecha and the Spanish centre-half Eric Garcia who has played for the first team. In the Under-17s age group, the club have Jayden Braff, signed from PSV Eindhoven, and Ben Knight, the teenage midfielder acquired from Ipswich Town among others.

It is a tough business, and City are in it to fight for the best talent, even if that means acquiring the players of smaller, less wealthy clubs. The likelihood is that Cardiff will be entitled to 10 per cent of the fee for Matondo, although it will be little consolation. City’s Under-16s and Under-15s are both national champions and have players acquired from Watford - where Sancho originated – Millwall, Southend United, Carlisle United and Reading.

Under the academy director Jason Wilcox and the head of coaching Simon Davies, a former Manchester United apprentice, the club have a policy of playing under-age teams in development football. Their pitch to prospective players and parents is that they have an unrivalled programme of education and opportunity in the development game.

The Under-18s team that competes in the FA Youth Cup, for which Matondo would still have been eligible, largely field 16 and 17 year olds against older boys. The Under-23s are made up of 17 and 18-year-olds, a side that got further than any other Premier League club in the Checkatrade Trophy. The first team is, of course, another matter. But the club believe they add great value in their development – it is not just a simple case of harvesting the best young players in the country.

The boys are recruited by the European scout David Fernandez, a former professional from Spain who played in Scotland, and the head of recruitment Joe Shields, himself poached from Crystal Palace. The boys are famously offered the option of private schooling from year seven and they train six days a week.

It is an intense way to spend one’s teenage life and whatever the player’s career, whatever the circumstances of his departure from the academy, there is a leaving day which doubles as kind of celebration. This is when goodbyes are said to the staff who helped them through the unusual life of the elite child athlete and they automatically become part of an alumni network run by the club. Matondo left the club on good terms, even if they would rather he had not gone.

There is a high level of pastoral care, and an expensive network of house-parents who put the boys up, drivers and medical care but the investment has proven to be worth it. The model is developing large numbers of elite level footballer, very few of whom will play for City. The vast majority, however, will go on to yield a profit to the club.

[Chester Perry]

Now transfer deadline day has passed - there will be the usual analysis of transfer spending for the season across the leagues. What is evident is that despite record revenues at virtually every Premier League club (primarily as a result of TV revenues) transfer spending is down. The BBC have kicked things off and make some suggestions as to why they think the spending has dropped.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47079813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

perfectly reasonable suggestions but I think they like many and certainly many on here are missing two points particularly the first one:

- the impact of the current FFP rules on clubs - transfers tend to lead to a bigger wage for the new player and in turn can trigger a number of salary upgrades with a club either as a result of contract stipulation or as a means of keeping a standard structure and therefore a happy camp, The rules on wage bill hikes have previously been discussed on this thread.

- The vast improvement in young player development over the last decade in this country means that almost every club is pushing an academy players into the matchday squad - this saves a fotune on spending, whether it be McNeil for us or the brigades of young players at Liverpool

[Stproc]

Man City and Chelsea (and others to a lesser degree) are basically farming kids. They not only suck in vast numbers of local lads but then buy up anybody from smaller clubs and many foreign players too. Makes it extremely difficult for us to compete at any level and further divides the game

[Chester Perry]

I think Man City have made more profit from their Academy than Burnley have from all it's football operations in the last 4 years

[Royboyclaret]

I think Man City have made more profit from their Academy than Burnley have from all it's football operations in the last 4 years

That's quite a claim, Chester Perry, particularly if you're including the '17/'18 financial year.

[Chester Perry]

I know Roy but all we know about is transfer fees and that is a bit north of £150m - no knowledge of Loan fees and can it cost more that £15m a year to run - I suspect the profit is £100m to £120m in the period and in that time Burnley profit could be £90m to £110m (we made a loss last time in the championship when paying bonuses)

probably should have said suspect rather than think - but there you go

[Royboyclaret]

Ok, cheers for that. So over £150m received for their young stars in the last four years, that's a remarkable figure.

How many players does that represent?

[Erasmus]

I know this thread seems confined to a few posters only, but I for one very much appreciate the information it provides and carefully read every post. So please keep it up. Fascinating insights here.

[Paul Waine]

Yes, great conversation and great "facts" from Chester and Roy - and, maybe one or two others.

I put "facts" in inverted commas as, naturally, some of the figures are financial projections rather than the reported financial figures when the latter can only be known when the clubs have published their accounts, always assuming the financial disclosures reach that degree of detail.

Re youth development, academies etc, The Times has reported this morning that Chelsea are offering Hudson-Odoi £70,000 per week to re-sign with them. Hudson-Odoi's agents aren't interested because the boy wants 1st XI game time - which Sarri's model won't provide.

Lots of other stuff also in The Times re transfer window including Jannsen - back in Spurs squad and B'ham risking a second round of FFP points deduction by rejecting £12 m offers for Che.

[Hipper]

Do City not wish to sell these young talents to fellow Premier League clubs?

[Chester Perry]

Roy

the big deals totalling £148m are for 15 players - there will be other deals for lesser talents (not unlike ours for Mee and Trippier) that we will not hear anything about unless you follow lower league clubs here and across Europe

Hipper

they are happy enough to sell certain levels of players to Premier League clubs (just not the really big clubs and with first option buyback clauses) e,g, Kelechi Iheanacho (Leicester) - £25.4m, Angus Gunn (Southampton) - £13.5m. Also need to remember that these players are really young and want first team football on a regular basis - so Europe is attractive to them from that standpoint - just see Hudson-Odoi after talking to his mate Sancho

[tiger76]

Yes, great conversation and great "facts" from Chester and Roy - and, maybe one or two others.

I put "facts" in inverted commas as, naturally, some of the figures are financial projections rather than the reported financial figures when the latter can only be known when the clubs have published their accounts, always assuming the financial disclosures reach that degree of detail.

Re youth development, academies etc, The Times has reported this morning that Chelsea are offering Hudson-Odoi £70,000 per week to re-sign with them. Hudson-Odoi's agents aren't interested because the boy wants 1st XI game time - which Sarri's model won't provide.

Lots of other stuff also in The Times re transfer window including Jannsen - back in Spurs squad and B'ham risking a second round of FFP points deduction by rejecting £12 m offers for Che.

Jannsen not in the 18 for Spurs today.

Serves Brum right if they get a further points deduction,this is what happens when you hire happy arry,he walks away to the jungle and leaves chaos.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

This thread is the best one on here tbh, it's the main reason why I still visit the place.

It's also staggering how much guff is spouted on other threads by people in regards to finances which just shows how little they've read on this thread.

[Chester Perry]

Article on the financial woes at Arsenal (yes Arsenal who posted record profits last year) and how new wage deals led to the loss of Ramsey for nothing

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... ppled.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

silly sums but if you do not structure the contracts right (clauses for Champs League etc - even a seemingly well run and mega rich club can get into problems quickly

[Chester Perry]

With the arrest of Rui Pinto aka the famous "John" Football leaks has effectively been stopped in it's tracks- here is an interview first with his lawyer then with the man himself.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 49970.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 51121.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Interesting reading and a little foreboding when you read the very last sentence from Pinto

[Chester Perry]

Back to the Deloitte report - @SwissRamble gives another excellent insight into the nitty gritty of the numbers and offers a note of optimism to Man Utd

https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 9784516608" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


more detail on how the big six compare with the biggest on the continent


https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/ ... 8482174976" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[aggi]

Some thoughts on the current Premier League TV deals
https://www.football365.com/news/the-fu ... v-part-one" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting comparison on the audiences compared to the cost per game, looking at it that way it seems pretty unsustainable.

[Chester Perry]

good find Aggi - not surprising and the next round of deals show the rights are on the cusp of being more lucrative in the international arena, I have always refused to pay the sky buck, but given that football is core to Sky especially it will always generate a substantial (though not ever increasing income). It seems that the sports subscriptions are not unlike Gym membership - pay for the year use once or twice and wonder why you have done it.

The dichotomy for the armchair fan is that they are willing to pay to watch football on tv but to prevent a monopoly of rights ownership (with consequential risks of price exploitation) they are being forced to pay multiple subscriptions to different right sholders and are sonsequently being exploited.

There are problems if the Premier League brings broadcasting in-house, over their own distribution channels - as the big clubs will continue their fight for a perceived "fair share" at the expense of smaller clubs and thus diluting the competition further. As suggested in the article ultimately the big clubs want the right to control rights for their own games and that will lead to the stupidity of the la-liga deal a few years ago with the big clubs getting up to 6 times more than the little ones (though I think the ratios would be much much wider)

[Royboyclaret]

Some thoughts on the current Premier League TV deals
https://www.football365.com/news/the-fu ... v-part-one" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting comparison on the audiences compared to the cost per game, looking at it that way it seems pretty unsustainable.

What a thought-provoking article that is, the best I've read in some time.

Clearly the latest Sky deals are stretching the product to it's absolute limit.

The only bit I'd contest is profit requirement for each PL club. As aggi has pointed out on numerous occasions all PL clubs are now reporting annual profits and in truth there's no need for them to increase those levels. If that means continuing to pay exhorbitant player salaries then so be it, or at least until the whole caboosh comes crumbling down before our very eyes.

[Chester Perry]

What the Swiss Ramble post illustrates is that very big clubs are aware of the looming stagnation in tv monies and are actively pursuing commercial income as the revenue growth opportunity - for United it constitutes 40% of total revenue with City not far behind - for clubs where TV revenues aren't as high it can be much higher when they structure themselves appropriately - at Bayern it is 56% - astonishing

[Royboyclaret]

What the Swiss Ramble post illustrates is that very big clubs are aware of the looming stagnation in tv monies and are actively pursuing commercial income as the revenue growth opportunity - for United it constitutes 40% of total revenue with City not far behind - for clubs where TV revenues aren't as high it can be much higher when they structure themselves appropriately - at Bayern it is 56% - astonishing

This, of course, is where Burnley lag way behind. In the financial results to Jun'18 I suspect perhaps £8m within a Total Revenue of £140m, simply a different level to the top PL clubs.

[Chester Perry]

Indeed Roy and it is something the our Chairman talked about at the end of last season - It is why we have a new Shirt sponsor and the Cricketfield stand is covered in that Red nonsense - I seem to remember that Garlick thought there was a lot of room for improvement and for us it is vital if we are too grow our wage bill beyond the restrictions applied to tv earnings

[Erasmus]

I know it has been indicated that we can't substantially increase our wage bill without increasing commercial revenue, but does this include transfer dealings as well? What I mean is, could the fee received for Sam Vokes contribute towards a permitted increase in the wage bill?

[Royboyclaret]

I know it has been indicated that we can't substantially increase our wage bill without increasing commercial revenue, but does this include transfer dealings as well? What I mean is, could the fee received for Sam Vokes contribute towards a permitted increase in the wage bill?

No, is the simple answer to that, Erasmus.

It's purely connected to increased commercial activity, and, in that respect, we are light years behind the rest. We've improved a little of late but the starting point was unbelievably low (£6.3m within a Total Revenue of £121.2m was the figure year to Jun'17 or 5%). Yes, that's 5%, compared to the percentages quoted above by Chester Perry for City and United.

We are simply existing in a different world and I guess we ought to be grateful we are even on the same fixture list as most of these PL teams. All that said, I'm not at all certain that Garlick and co. would even consider increasing our Wage bill to a figure beyond 50% of Turnover, my suspicions are that even that figure gives most of our Board a nosebleed.

[Chester Perry]

I posted on Sunday about the looming financial problems for the worlds 9th biggest earning club (Arsenal) and here is another article breaking down the detail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... indow.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Incidentally according to SwissRamble stuff I posted yesterday their commercial earnings are very poor in comparison to the other big boys both in totals and ratio of overall turnover and it is this more than missing Champions league revenue that is making them feel the pinch

[aggi]

Further to yesterday's article on TV rights here's an article on what's happening in Spain at the moment.
https://www.football365.com/news/spanis ... t-tv-greed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I could well see this as being what the TV companies and big clubs are looking for in the UK.

[Chester Perry]

Aggi - The Spanish clubs had to agree to that to get a "fairer" not a fair distribution of the tv money - if any of the big 2 get to the latter stages of the Champs League just watch how they manipulate tv schedules to give them an advantage - whilst our lot play Sunday at 4:30 away then Saturday at 12:30 (both against teams that refuse to turnover) with a European game squeezed in.

A key point in the article was timing catering to international audiences - apart from el classico - you will find that these games are for the most part scheduled around Premier League games as they command the biggest international audiences - while in America they also will have to cntend with their huge franchise sports in the schedule.

For Association Football the Premier League will maintain top global billing as long as it has a competitive depth. That requires a relatively even distribution of monies to continue despite the greed of the big six. Should they go running off to a European or even global superleague all bets are off and we will fast become a financial minnow again as there will be very little tv money for what is left behind, with the added consequence of less opportunities for commercial income. Meaning matchday income will dominate revenue for clubs, all this and of course the super euro/worldleague will stagger kickoffs across the weekend for maximum exposure and ignore the 2:30 - 5:15 tv block in the UK.

The alternative is likely to be an 18 or even 16 team top league with the big six still in (no mid-week fixtures) and a closed shop Euro League that plays mid week - That is what the big boys really want - everything basically

[Chester Perry]

Seems we are going to have to wait a bit longer for that European Super League - I wonder what UEFA had to give away for that - Champs League payments are supposedly up over 50% this year already

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... oric-deal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chester Perry]

An Interesting article about the finances in the Championship from the perspective of the smaller clubs

http://trainingground.guru/articles/pau ... ampionship" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

we are currently (as every season in the Premier League) fighting to avoid relegation - but just what does that mean:
- for us and Huddersfield it is the potential for 3 years of Parachute payments (on a steep descent), a significantly reduced wage bill (due to contract clauses if inserted), no bonus payments and perhaps more worryingly a huge posse of scavengers looking to tempt our best players away
- for Cardiff and Fulham it is only 2 years of Parachute Payments and the rest

There is of course a very different set of FFP rules to negotiate, but for all clubs who come down there is a desperate need for an immediate return or the whole shebang can collapse (especially for clubs who are not that big and have little opportunity to grow matchday and commercial income. What happens if you don't go back up immediately? The Championship is littered with clubs who have had an apparent eternal struggle to get back and rebuild but very few do it without a coherent plan and stability within the club

[Chester Perry]

An intriguing Podcast on Arsenal and their travails during the transfer window - including the financial constraints discussed above.

https://arseblog.com/2019/02/episode-51 ... -ornstein/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

it does make you wonder what chance we have when a club this big (attempting to run a self-sustaining model) with a reputation for developing players from within finds like so difficult.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

What were you googling to find a blog about Arsenal?

Arseblog is something I'm not sure I want to Google...

[Chester Perry]

What were you googling to find a blog about Arsenal?

Arseblog is something I'm not sure I want to Google...

linked via SwissRamble on twitter - sorry to disappoint

[Royboyclaret]

An Interesting article about the finances in the Championship from the perspective of the smaller clubs

http://trainingground.guru/articles/pau ... ampionship" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

we are currently (as every season in the Premier League) fighting to avoid relegation - but just what does that mean:
- for us and Huddersfield it is the potential for 3 years of Parachute payments (on a steep descent), a significantly reduced wage bill (due to contract clauses if inserted), no bonus payments and perhaps more worryingly a huge posse of scavengers looking to tempt our best players away
- for Cardiff and Fulham it is only 2 years of Parachute Payments and the rest

There is of course a very different set of FFP rules to negotiate, but for all clubs who come down there is a desperate need for an immediate return or the whole shebang can collapse (especially for clubs who are not that big and have little opportunity to grow matchday and commercial income. What happens if you don't go back up immediately? The Championship is littered with clubs who have had an apparent eternal struggle to get back and rebuild but very few do it without a coherent plan and stability within the club

Not sure about the "no bonus payments", Chester Perry. The last season we were in the Championship the players shared a bonus of over £11m, and considering the Wage bill that year was just £27m that bonus was substantial to say the least.

Incidentally we took the blame for the reduction to two years parachute payments for first year promoted clubs following our abysmal financial attempt to stay in the PL in '14/'15.

[Chester Perry]

No bonus payments in the relegation season - sorry should have made that clear

we did take the blame for shorter period of parachute payments - overall though I think it is a good thing - competition wise - yet it does encourage some frantic spending - see Newcastle, Villa and Boro - and for the latter two will see some very frantic restructuring if they don't get promotion this year (even with Villa's extra year of payments)

[Royboyclaret]

An intriguing Podcast on Arsenal and their travails during the transfer window - including the financial constraints discussed above.

https://arseblog.com/2019/02/episode-51 ... -ornstein/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

it does make you wonder what chance we have when a club this big (attempting to run a self-sustaining model) with a reputation for developing players from within finds like so difficult.

Was in a heated debate with an Arsenal season ticket holder this very afternoon about their current financial plight. He was defending them to the hilt whilst I likened their situation to that of a runaway train.

To put it in context the latest huge contract signed by Mesut Ozil was valued at £63m whilst Burnley's last reported total Wage bill was £61.2m.