Football 2010-2011

[eFestivals]

anyone would think england had an important game on tonight...

It's a loss matey, or at the very least a nail-biter. It's going to be one of those scary England nights.

Still, at least our manager hasn't been getting his excuses for being crap in before the game.

[Benj]

I'd have thought that the reduction in the wages bill will be much around the drop in income from the CL, etc. They've lost a fair few players on big wages in the last few years, and they've been replaced by players who are surely on much less.

[ampersand]

It's a loss matey, or at the very least a nail-biter. It's going to be one of those scary England nights.

Still, at least our manager hasn't been getting his excuses for being crap in before the game.

[eFestivals]

Mascherano, Benayoun and Aqualani* have gone, is there anyone else?

Reina's on a new contract and didn't Gerrard and Torres also sign new ones in the summer (may have been last summer)?

And of course you also then have Joe 'Better than Messi' Cole who's sitting pretty on his 5 million a year, which I suspect will cover Mascherano and Benayoun's wedge.

They deffo have not saved 20 million plus.

*assuming Juventus are paying all his wedge

Reira too. Probably not huge wages, but 2 or 3 mill a year probably.

it's a little further away, but there was Alonso too - and while Aqualani was hyped up he surely couldn't have been on anything like the wedge that Alonso was.

I'd have thought that Mascho's and Yossi's wages combined came in at around £20k a week more than Cole is on, tho I'm only guessing.

I doubt wages are saving £20M, but they must be doing at least £5M from just the major players I'd guess. Then there's about 10 less minor players at the club which probably totals up as a couple of mill.

And Liverpool's income shouldn't be down by anything like £20M. How do you reach that figure?

Remember, Man Utd only manage to turn over £100M from all on-field activities, so Chumps league money must only be about £10M - and Liverpool won't have lost that full amount cos the Europa earns them money at around half the rate. And Prem positions are about £1M different for each place - so I'd say it's far nearer £10M in income they've lost rather than £20M, plus they'll have saved some of that back by other means.

Edited October 12, 2010 by eFestivals

[Benj]

And Liverpool's income shouldn't be down by anything like £20M. How do you reach that figure?

Edited October 12, 2010 by Benj

[eFestivals]

http://www.footballeconomy.com/content/champions-league-bonanza

Its miles more than you realise

and that's not taking into account- gates/hospitality/sponsors bonus/other match day income-

"There is a big gap between the sums earned from the Champions League and the Europa League, something that will hit Liverpool hard this season. As the beaten Europa League finalists Fulham earned €10m in television income and prize money. This was less than half the €29m Liverpool received despite being knocked out of the Champions League at the group stage."

It will be down by well over 20 million when you take all Euro revenues into account.

yep - that's more than I thought it was.

Also re- wage savings you've got 90k a week on Cole, which may not quite cover Benayoun and Mascherano, you also then have to add all of this which will cover them by themselves-

Defender Paul Konchesky from Fulham for a fee of €5m; Portuguese midfielder Raul Meireles from Porto for a fee of €13m; Australian goalkeeper Brad Jones on loan from Middlesbrough for a fee of €2.8m; Danish midfielder Christian Poulsen from Juventus for a fee of €5.5m; Scottish defender Danny Wilson from Glasgow Rangers for a fee of €2.3m; Midfielder Joe Cole on a free transfer from Chelsea; Serbian midfielder Milan Jovanovic on a free transfer from Standard; Midfielder Jonjo Shelvey from Charlton Athletic for a fee of €2m.

That lot is a saving, not a loss - they shipped out many more players than they brought in this summer, and the replacements they brought in were (overall) lesser players than those that went out.

I really don't think you can say they will be saving much and they will be losing a minimum of 19 million Euros from the Champions League payments on their own. They will make nothing like a 50 million operating profit this year, unless they sell a few more players, no chance

OK, maybe not £50M, but £40M (ignoring debts) should still be achieveable if things have been well managed.

And given that the club was on the market thru that time I'd say it's unlikely that they'd have stitched themselves up by increasing their player costs.

[Benj]

so Chumps league money must only be about £10M

[eFestivals]

Why would clubs be so bothered about 4th for just 10 million quid, it was miles more than that when Leeds spent big going for it. They missed it one season and that was the end of them.

Nah, Leeds were f**ked anyway. It had little to do with the CL - they could have won it and the same would still have happened. Ridsdale thought he could cook the books and it wouldn't catch up with him, no different to what he tried for a 2nd time at Cardiff (where the Cardiff fans were saying he wouldn't do the same thing twice ).

It's not particularly the money that clubs want Chumps footie for (tho of course that's very welcome), it's the prestige it gives and the ability to attract top players that comes with that.

[Benj]

That lot is a saving, not a loss - they shipped out many more players than they brought in this summer, and the replacements they brought in were (overall) lesser players than those that went out.

[Benj]

Nah, Leeds were f**ked anyway. It had little to do with the CL - they could have won it and the same would still have happened. Ridsdale thought he could cook the books and it wouldn't catch up with him, no different to what he tried for a 2nd time at Cardiff (where the Cardiff fans were saying he wouldn't do the same thing twice ).

It's not particularly the money that clubs want Chumps footie for (tho of course that's very welcome), it's the prestige it gives and the ability to attract top players that comes with that.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Benj

[Steve P]

It's not particularly the money that clubs want Chumps footie for (tho of course that's very welcome), it's the prestige it gives and the ability to attract top players that comes with that.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Steve P

[eFestivals]

Really? Im not sure if they have, they've let a few nothing Youth team players go on top of who you've mentioned, they've made 6 major first team squad signings though. Konchesky, Jovanovic, Cole, Poulsen, Meireles, Wilson (actually probably not major but still will be on 20k+ minimum), then that boro keeper and Shelvey on that list too. Its a substantial influx and I really can't see it saving them much over who has gone.

4 out on significant wedge, 8 in, its hard to see any significant savings

check here:-

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/summer-2010-lfc-ins-and-outs

You'll see a greater number of players going out, and Cole aside, the outgoings were the same level or higher than the incomings.

(make sure you scroll down below the Yossi pic to get the full list - I missed those on first read).

It's perhaps not huge savings, but it certainly looks to me as savings.

I'd be shocked if they made more than 10 million myself but Im not sure how much of that fat Standard Chartered wedge they'd still get without CL appearances. Their Revenues will be down across the board (bar maybe the sponsorship deal) whilst, personally, I dont believe they've made any significant savings

prize money is a very small part of any clubs income. TV money is of course more (tho we've covered that in the CL parts - they're down there), but I doubt the sponsorship is success-linked (aside from perhaps a bonus for winning something, rather than a reduction for being poor).

And at the same time, you'd not think they'd weaken the squad so that they don't make the CL again! OOOPS

like any well-run business, it's about balancing all things to get the maximum result without over-extending yourselves and dropping yourself right in it. Given where the club were (including being up for sale) then it will have only been fools who would have had expectations higher than what turned out to be the reality.

[eFestivals]

Totally disagree there mate, it's all about the money. It's not the pretige that the players move for, it's the wages that the champs league money allows clubs to pay them.

Nah. It's in the mix, but not exclusively.

Would Shitty have attracted the players it has done over the last couple of seasons if the same money was on offer to those players but no hope of Chumps footie?

(Yes, I know they've not got there yet, but only a fool will be thinking that they won't do. It's taken longer than some expected tho)

[Benj]

Totally disagree there mate, it's all about the money. It's not the pretige that the players move for, it's the wages that the champs league money allows clubs to pay them.

[Benj]

check here:-

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/summer-2010-lfc-ins-and-outs

You'll see a greater number of players going out, and Cole aside, the outgoings were the same level or higher than the incomings.

(make sure you scroll down below the Yossi pic to get the full list - I missed those on first read).

It's perhaps not huge savings, but it certainly looks to me as savings.

[eFestivals]

But you can't afford to pay them without the money!

Its a cash cow, like that article says, how can you afford to pay the likes of Glen Johnson £139,000 a week £7.2 million a year!) with a 30 million hole in your budget.

The people who run the clubs want the CL for the cash, its that simple. Im an Everton fan, the CL would make a massive difference to what we could achieve on and off the pitch, it would single handidly increase revenues by 40% and turn a 7 million loss into a 20 million profit. That's Crazy stuff.

Is Johnson really on those wages?

Anyway, there's a big difference between what an owner wants from a club as a business and what he (or a fan) might want from the footballing side of things.

For example, Newc fans made the mistake of believing all the guff that Halls and Shepard spouted, about trying to win the Prem - that was never any part of their plan. They milked the club royally, and sold out to a mug punter at a point where luck rather than ambition had them doing well, maximising the value they could get from the sale (combined too with some hidden debts, so Ashley didn't know he was getting as poor a deal as he was - his fault).

If you look at Leeds, did CL cash make their owners more profits or less? It made them less, because of what it cost them to get there - and ultimately it bankrupted the club. They might have managed to survive if their performances had matched their ambition, but it's very unlikely. They were screwed by bad business decisions more than by anything which happened on the pitch.

There's clubs at the bottom of the Prem turning bigger profits than clubs at the top. Those clubs aren't particularly interested in CL money, cos they're well aware what it would cost them to get their hands on it.

[Benj]

prize money is a very small part of any clubs income. TV money is of course more (tho we've covered that in the CL parts - they're down there), but I doubt the sponsorship is success-linked (aside from perhaps a bonus for winning something, rather than a reduction for being poor).

[eFestivals]

Having a quick look, it looks like the CL makes upwards of 25% of the top clubs revenues (for far less games), if a business suddenly loses 25% of its revenue, somethings got to give.

Yep, and what gives is players. And Liverpool have been giving on players for 3 years now.

But alongside that "the CL makes upwards of 25% of the top clubs revenues" the fact that the CL makes upwards of 25% of those top clubs expenses - just as something has to give on the way down, there's a cost to getting up and staying up. It's not free money.

And while Leeds may have been goosed long term whatever, the failure to qualify for the CL is what led to their super quick demise.

Nope, not true. It all fell apart far too quickly for it to be just that. They'd over-extended themselves, and it was only ever going to go that way.

If you look at the players they sold off, those players brought in far more than the CL did, yet it still wasn't enough to save them in the short term. And that shows for certain that CL money wouldn't have saved them.

[eFestivals]

I think the best you can hope for is even stevens, I reckon with Reina's fat rise the wage bill (bar bonuses) will be up this year

"I" can hope for? I don't much hope for anything here, I'm not a Liverpool fan. I'm merely trying to say it as I see it.

Meanwhile, you do have an interest - in thinking the worst.

[eFestivals]

They finished 2nd the year before, I think many RS genuinely believed they would have another crack at the title (they are in the main fools mind), they never expected to finish 7th and I very much suspect that neither did Benitez or 'dem yanks'

Only the foolish ones who thought Alonso wasn't a fantastic player.

Which does of course include Rafa, but all the same his transfer dealings were nowhere near as bad as they've been portrayed from the financial angle (from the effect of the strength of the squad, yes).

[ralph250]

Inter £39.8m

Man Utd £37.4m

Bayern £36.1m

Arsenal £27.3m

Chelsea £26.3m

Liverpool £23.6m

Europa

Fulham £8.1m

Everton £2.8m

Liverpool £2.3m after dropping down

Rangers £14m for CL

Celtic £1.5m for Europa

Breakdown is as follows:

Teams competing in the UEFA Champions League group stage this season can expect to receive a minimum amount of €7.2m according to the revenue distribution system in place for the 2010/11 campaign.

Each of the 32 clubs taking part in the UEFA Champions League group stage that kicks off on Tuesday will receive a participation bonus of €3.9m, plus a match bonus of €550,000 per group game played. On top of that, the following performance bonuses will be paid: €800,000 for every win and €400,000 for every draw in the group stage.

There are additional payments made to the teams that progress in the competition with €3m the reward for advancing to the round of 16, €3.3m for reaching the quarter-finals and €4.2m for a semi-final place. The winners of the final at Wembley Stadium on 28 May will collect a further €9m, with €5.6m going to the runners-up.

By way of example, any side winning all six group games would earn €15m – comprising €12m for their group stage performance plus €3m for getting to the last 16.

In addition, participating clubs will be entitled to a share of the market pool based on the commercial value of their domestic television market, the number of UEFA Champions League matches they play this season and their final position in the domestic league table last term. They will also keep their UEFA Champions League gate receipts.

Each of the 20 teams that contested the play-offs has received €2.1m.

http://www.uefa.com/uefa/management/finance/news/newsid=1528290.html

[Benj]

Is Johnson really on those wages?

[Benj]

"I" can hope for? I don't much hope for anything here, I'm not a Liverpool fan. I'm merely trying to say it as I see it.

Meanwhile, you do have an interest - in thinking the worst.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Benj

[Benj]

Only the foolish ones who thought Alonso wasn't a fantastic player.

Which does of course include Rafa, but all the same his transfer dealings were nowhere near as bad as they've been portrayed from the financial angle (from the effect of the strength of the squad, yes).

[Steve P]

Nah. It's in the mix, but not exclusively.

Would Shitty have attracted the players it has done over the last couple of seasons if the same money was on offer to those players but no hope of Chumps footie?

(Yes, I know they've not got there yet, but only a fool will be thinking that they won't do. It's taken longer than some expected tho)