Taken from The Times

It sort of explains the situation with the domestic broadcast money

Shows how much a place or two higher up the table is worth, yet another reason why we need to win tomorrow, and try and climb higher up the standings.

It is also fundamentally wrong on the International rights, and facilities/broadcast match fees - all 20 clubs share equal rights up to £43.18m the rest is then distributed as merit based income using the standard formula for that, facilities fees are a minimum of circa £12m plus an aperance fee above a minimum number of games, don't think we have ever reach £14m in total there. Also missing from that list is the equally share of commercial rights and the remaining rebate contribution of each club from last year (ours is £4.9m) - not forgetting the additional equal share from unused parachute payments - it is overstating our central payments earnings by anything around £20m - £25m this season

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 6:37 pm

It is also fundamentally wrong on the International rights, and facilities/broadcast match fees - all 20 clubs share equal rights up to £43.18m the rest is then distributed as merit based income using the standard formula for that, facilities fees are a minimum of circa £12m plus an aperance fee above a minimum number of games, don't think we have ever reach £14m in total there. Also missing from that list is the equally share of commercial rights and the remaining rebate contribution of each club from last year (ours is £4.9m) - not forgetting the additional equal share from unused parachute payments - it is overstating our central payments earnings by anything around £20m - £25m this season

Just cut to the chase! How much do we get?

Forget what our revenue was for 19/20, but remember it being around £130m... so we’ve made that much just from TV money this year?

I’d that’s true, presumably it’s a record year for revenue despite Covid?

Edit - sorry, missed Chester’s post.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 7:41 pm

Forget what our revenue was for 19/20, but remember it being around £130m... so we’ve made that much just from TV money this year?

I’d that’s true, presumably it’s a record year for revenue despite Covid?

Edit - sorry, missed Chester’s post.

TV revenue 2019/20 £113.491m after £8.5m rebate contribution that was with a 10th place finish

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 7:48 pm

TV revenue 2019/20 £113.491m after £8.5m rebate contribution that was with a 10th place finish

But how much for this season? And whatever that figure is, how much is it short of what would have been expected had it been a normal season?

Leisure wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 8:33 pm

But how much for this season? And whatever that figure is, how much is it short of what would have been expected had it been a normal season?

at the moment it will be £4.9m down because that is our known remaining TV rebate contribution - other rebates may or may not be added - if we finish 17th is would probably be less than £105m in total

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 10:38 pm

at the moment it will be £4.9m down because that is our known remaining TV rebate contribution - other rebates may or may not be added - if we finish 17th is would probably be less than £105m in total

So instead of the £131m which it states in the table, it's more likely to be £105m but what about loss of earned income ie season tickets, gate receipts, catering etc etc?

Leisure wrote: ↑

Sat May 22, 2021 10:59 pm

So instead of the £131m which it states in the table, it's more likely to be £105m but what about loss of earned income ie season tickets, gate receipts, catering etc etc?

I would be surprised if our revenues for the year exceed £120m or so (there are some murmurings tonight that the outstanding rebate is to be be split in two over this season and next so we may have a bit more money

How do those rebates affect the Clubs that were relegated if it's over 2 seasons?

According to the article in the Daily Mail we'll get £106 million

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... eason.html

Spijed wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 10:33 am

According to the article in the Daily Mail we'll get £106 million

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... eason.html

Less than £5.1 million rebate

jtv wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 10:54 am

Less than £5.1 million rebate

Which figures are correct?

Spijed wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 12:23 pm

Which figures are correct?

This is the table in the article. I was referring to the column headings. Dunno if the figures are coirrect.

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

jtv wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 10:54 am

Less than £5.1 million rebate

This rebate issue is an interesting one - The Premier League Handbook 2020/21 Appendix 16 (Page 319 of this pdf https://resources.premierleague.com/pre ... 110920.pdf) describes how the rebate for the 2019/20 would be calculated, it gives us a total of £13.5m - Our 2019/20 Accounts say we paid £8,5m and a simple piece of maths says we therefore have £4.9m outstanding

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 1:31 pm

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

Not sure our previous board claimed that. But are you aware that the club has some outgoings?

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 1:31 pm

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

We haven't made that at all - we've received that amount of money from the Premier League payments but one hell of a lot of that has gone through the door immediately.

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 1:31 pm

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

I would love to see a detailed analysis of this from you, with cost/revenue breakdowns and including the roadmap of all the other costs including a full list of assumptions and risks, bearing in mind each year your are planning budgets forward not looking back at results.

The Times admits they got it wrong about Premier League tv money.

New report in today's Times.

Big clubs paid more despite every game being televised

Martyn Ziegler, Chief Sports Reporter, Tuesday May 25 2021, 12.01am, The Times

The bigger Premier League clubs will be paid up to £18 million more than the smaller teams for live TV matches despite every game of the season being televised because of the absence of crowds.

Facility fees of about £1.2 million are usually paid each time a Premier League club appears in a live TV game, with every club guaranteed a minimum of £12 million, but for teams such as Liverpool and Manchester United that can total more than £30 million.

The Premier League confirmed that facility fees would be paid only for the 200 matches that were contracted to be broadcast in the usual TV slots. The other 180 games, such as those shown at 3pm on Saturdays, did not qualify. As the bigger clubs are more in demand from the broadcasters, they have more contracted live TV matches and so earn more in facility fees.

The estimated earnings for the season show the champions Manchester City with about £167 million and the bottom side Sheffield United on £93 million. Apart from the facility fees, prize money is allocated based on where a club finish in the table, as is a portion of the overseas TV rights, and all the clubs receive an equal share of about £76 million from domestic and overseas rights.

The clubs will all have their total reduced as part of a scheme to pay the £330 million broadcasters’ rebate resulting from the disruption caused by Covid. The 2019-20 champions Liverpool must pay £17.3 million over the next two seasons, with other clubs having reductions on a sliding scale of £7.1 million for the bottom club, who also face up to £2.3 million less in parachute payments.

Each club promoted for the 2020-21 campaign — Leeds United, Fulham and West Bromwich Albion — must pay £8.4 million towards the rebate over two seasons.

Premier League estimated earnings 2020-2021

Team, Equal share TV money, Merit Payment, Facility fees, Overseas TV money, Total (£ million)

Manchester City 76, 35, 28, 28, 167
Manchester United, 76, 33, 30 , 27, 166
Liverpool, 76, 32, 31, 25, 164
Chelsea, 76, 30, 27, 24, 157
Leicester City, 76, 28, 20, 22, 146
West Ham United, 76, 26, 20, 21, 143
Tottenham, 76, 25, 25, 20, 146
Arsenal, 76, 23, 25, 18, 142
Leeds United, 76, 21, 19, 17, 133
Everton, 76, 19, 18, 15, 128
Aston Villa, 76, 18, 15, 14, 123
Newcastle United, 76, 16, 15, 13, 120
Wolves, 76, 14, 14, 11, 115
Crystal Palace, 76, 12, 13, 10, 111
Southampton, 76, 11, 13, 8, 108
Brighton, 76, 9, 13, 7, 105
Burnley, 76, 7, 13, 6, 102
Fulham, 76, 5, 13, 5, 99
West Brom, 76, 4, 13, 3, 96
Sheffield United, 76, 2, 13, 2, 93


****************************

Obviously, these figures are very different to the table in The Times on Monday - and, also the S.Times on Sunday.

Today's print edition includes a note that the table has been corrected. I imagine that maybe someone at the Premier League called the Times to explain how they'd got it wrong.

I've also post this on the MMT thread.

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 1:31 pm

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

Hi Woodley, are you still in Woodley, Reading? I had lunch in the Lakeside, Woodley last Thursday. First time in a restaurant, indoors since early December.

Re "£500m" - yes, we've received a lot of revenue but the club also pays out a lot in wages and other expenses. Who wants the job of telling the players that we've signed to play for us that they can't have any wages because we've paid out £XX million to sign them?

UTC

That looks better from the times - I see no commercial income revenue share (which should be equal) which was £5m in the previous cycle. It could be in the equal share element but that appears unlikely given the figure offered

It also shows what I was taking about a few weeks back about the importance of a strong finish to the season - Newcastle moved from 17th to 12th and earned an extra £16m in merit income - imagine what that would have done for our financial picture, if it had been us to finish 12th, even after bonuses it would have seen us £8m - £11m better off

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 23, 2021 1:31 pm

We have made over £500m from our time in the Premier league and that makes our previous boards claim that we can't sign players due to no money ring a little hollow

We’ve made a few quid from selling players too.

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Tue May 25, 2021 4:04 pm

That looks better from the times - I see no commercial income revenue share (which should be equal) which was £5m in the previous cycle. It could be in the equal share element but that appears unlikely given the figure offered

It also shows what I was taking about a few weeks back about the importance of a strong finish to the season - Newcastle moved from 17th to 12th and earned an extra £16m in merit income - imagine what that would have done for our financial picture, if it had been us to finish 12th, even after bonuses it would have seen us £8m - £11m better off

Ah CP, but we've been told the games post Fulham were " meaningless " , " friendlies " etc, etc., as if we're a club who can just throw away millions of pounds

karatekid wrote: ↑

Tue May 25, 2021 6:00 pm

We’ve made a few quid from selling players too.

and spent considerably more on buying them


still waiting hopefully for that breakdown of what could have been done by the board from Woodleyclaret