Xtratime Community banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Old Firm on list of richest clubs
MARTIN GREIG

CELTIC and Rangers have both finished in the top 20 in the Deloitte Football Money League for last season.

The Parkhead club occupy 13th position with a turnover of £69m, five places higher than last year. Rangers, meanwhile, are six places further back in 19th with a turnover of £57.1m.

British clubs make up half of the top 20, with Manchester United in first place. Their turnover of £172m maintains the Old Trafford club's top position for the eighth year in a row.

In second place, Real Madrid have halved the gap between themselves and Manchester United, while Chelsea and Barcelona are the biggest climbers, up from 10th to fourth position and 13th to seventh respectively.

British clubs differentiate themselves from their European counterparts through the revenue-earning capability of their stadium facilities.

The Old Firm clubs in particular have exploited this aspect to great effect and Scotland's dual representation in the top 20 outnumbers France and equals that of both Germany and Spain.

Paul Rawnsley, from the Sports Business Group at Deloitte, said: "In general, UK clubs have consistently managed, through focused investment and targeted marketing, to achieve a more balanced spread of revenues compared to many clubs on the continent.

"Many of Europe's leading clubs have a great, and as yet relatively unexploited, opportunity to develop significant income streams from their stadia."

Copyright © 2005 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,958 Posts
I'm glad that list was published because in my view in knocks down part of the arguement for joining the Premiership. Although the Old Firm would get more income at the moment Celtic are bringing in more than 15 Premiership clubs and Rangers are bringing in more than 13 of the Premiership clubs. It shows they are bringing in the kind of income that should see them being a European force without having to join another league.

1 (1) Man Utd £171.5m
2 (4) Real Madrid £156.3m
3 (3) AC Milan £147.2m
4 (10) Chelsea £143.7m
5 (2) Juventus £142.4m
6 (7) Arsenal £115m
7 (13) Barcelona £110.1m
8 (6) Inter Milan £110.3m
9 (5) Bayern Munich £110.1m
10 (8) Liverpool £92.3m
11 (10) Newcastle £90.5m
12 (11) Roma £72m
13 (18) Celtic £69m
14 (16) Tottenham £66.3m
15 (15) Lazio £65.8m
16 (-) Man City £61.9m
17 (14) Schalke £60.5m
18 (-) Marseille £58.3m
19 (-) Rangers £57.1m
20 (-) Aston Villa £55.9m
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,867 Posts
Disagree with you there a bit Chivo...we manage to get into the top 20 despite being held back. If we had a level playing field in TV money then both the Old Firm would be much nearer the top of the list.

From merchandise income Rangers are the 4th largest on the list and Celtic are also in the top 10. If both clubs had the extra TV money plus the extra exposure that playing in a bigger league would bring (which would then add to the commercial and merchandise revenue too) then they would both overtake Arsenal and be close to the top 5. If that was the case then there's no reason why they couldn't then start pushing into the footballing elite as well. Maybe not the "elite of the elite" like Man U or Real Madrid or Milan but up there with the best of the others....as it stands just now neither side are anywhere near those levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I agree that TV money is one of the reasons why we aren't higher up, we won't get a better TV deal though playing in the SPL.

I wouln't mind to see an official list of clubs income from Gate receipts/season books and merchandise sales, it would be interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,978 Posts
Turnover isn't a real indication of profitability anyway. If it was a list of how profitable clubs are, it would be a lot different. We'd be in a much better position to be regularly profitable if we moved down south.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,958 Posts
I know what you are saying guys. More money, better team. If we cannot compete with the rest of Europe based on our current income then there is something seriously wrong. Rather than sell out our history and join a foreign league we should be utilising our resources better. Remember that it is us as supporters who are ploughing that money into the club and if we are raising among the 20 in Europe then rather than saying we need more money we should be saying why are we not doing it in Europe with the current finances.

If I were a Man City or Villa fan I'd be pissed off at that chart but as a Rangers fan I think we should be doing better already. When we start utilising our current income to better effect- like the Monaco, Porto, etc. then we can start to look higher. Throwing more money at it to sell our history in return isn't the answer for me I'm afraid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,690 Posts
Chivo,

really enjoyed that last post and am inclined to agree with your sentiments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,958 Posts
The Judge said:
Chivo,

really enjoyed that last post and am inclined to agree with your sentiments.

:thumbsup: Just comfirming I didn't steal your password, we are not related and no money exhanged hands :smileani:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
In spain the big clubs have reserve sides in the Spannish second divsion. So why don't we do thjat in Scotland. How else can we gurantee the youth players at the big clubs can get expeiience of competitive football. Celtic are lucky in they play one Scottish youth in their first team.
Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, Celtic, and Rnagers should all have reserve sides in the SFL. This would guirantee the most talented scottish youht players of playing professional competive football in meaningul matches. The reserve league just gets crowds of 80 at present how is that supposed to prepare players for international football. At least in this system the youth players could get used to playing proper teams with big crowds.
It works in Sopain so why not try it here,.
The clubs have got enough players and money to do this. What harm would it do, in making sure the most alented youht players can play against proper teams in proper matches.
It works in Spain so why not try this here.
It would cost the SFA and SFL clubs nothing, would not need foerign players rules. .
Loaning players out is unreliable, we can't ban foreign playrs from the league, we canlt expect all clubs to stop buying in foetign players so this idea would gurnatee scotish players getting games. It works in Spain so why not here. Even Celta Vigo and Athletioc MAdrid have played in the second divsuion against reserve teams once relagted so why is it an insult to lower divsion clubs to do this, when most sfl clubs fill their grounds when the old firm visit.
The first division could be expanded to 18 teams, and 3 non league sides brought in to make up the numbers. Also reserve sides would be banned from promtion to the prmier, and if a reserve sides finsishes top the top non reserve sides could still be prmoted to the premier.
Hoe wlese can we get backl the the situtation where Rnagers anc Celtic produced a huge nuimbers of expirnced socittish footballers. We cant go back to the time when the old firm did no buy in foreign players so why not do this new ooption. Or do you want Scotland to lose?
Scottish youht players at big clubs dont get enough matches so how else do we give them atches and dont tell me the small clubs can produce all the international scotland needs because that it not hisotorically the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,452 Posts
In how many different places are you going to post this idea?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,958 Posts
mincecfc said:
In how many different places are you going to post this idea?
As many as it takes, the revoultion is here! :happy: :rolleyes:
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top