Deloitte Football Money League 2022 - Manchester City #1 for first time ever
- Thread starter Dolf
- Start date
Even Spurs is ahead of Arsenal. Arsenal is on the same tier (300m level) with BVB, Atletico and Inter.
I did not know Arsenal is no longer the "biggest" (in terms of revenue) club in North London.
I did not know Arsenal is no longer the "biggest" (in terms of revenue) club in North London.
Last edited:
It’s a piece of piss when you can sponsor yourself.
It is good to see Leicester, West ham, Aston Villa and Everton are doing great financially. it makes the league more competitive.
And to think people say romance in football is dead. It doesn't get more romantic than a club rise to the top from nothing, on the back of just hard work alone.
Last edited:
Top 4 of the money league was a given, and now we can't even make that.
United were top of the money league for a number of years, but will be down in 7th next year. Ed Woodward's famous claim in 2018 that "playing performance doesn’t really have a meaningful impact on the commercial side of the business", is predictably being shown to be untrue.
Has been proven false for ages. The top teams in that list can guarantee about 80m euros per year cause they are always in the latter stages of the CL. For us, it's not a given. Secondly, our commercial income growth has stalled. An financial advantage we had years back has disappeared.
One can hope - for his sake, I mean - that he was just trying to placate sponsors. If he actually meant it, he really is an idiot.
You can't ride on past achievements forever - regardless of how big your global fan base is. The latter will diminish over time if you become an also-ran.
Being on the list doesn't mean "doing great financially", at all.
You see Barca at 4th place, but their financials are as good as scorched Earth.
You've really gotta be a grade A fecking idiot to believe that to be true. Glad the stupid cnut has gone.
This only refers to revenue, isn't it? The money the club brings in. Not include operating cost or debt. This is not about "profit" the club generated. Am I right? Barcelona has a big job on hand to reduce operating cost and debt for sure.
Do RM make more money than us? I'm surprised by that.
It does show how insanely rich the EPL is. There are two German, two Italian, three Spanish, a French, and a Russian club in there - the other eleven(!!) clubs are all from the EPL.
It also makes you wonder about how well some of those EPL clubs are using all that money. Would West Ham, Wolves, Everton, or Villa have a good chance at finishing second in France, third in Italy or Germany, or fourth in Spain? Apart from Germany (the Bundesliga is a mess this year), I doubt it without an unexpected upset. Although in ther defense, I suppose you could argue that it's hard to attract top talent if you're unlikely to break into the EPL top 6.
Edit: If you're right about this being revenue only, I might be seeing this a bit too simplistically here.
I am 100% sure Arsenal is not making 300 million a year, i doubt Arsenal is making even 3 million profit a year, or any profit at all.
Significant impact from Covid. Loss of £107.3m in FY2021 & loss of £47.8m in FY2020.
Sounds about right. In my memory Arsenal only made profit by selling their best players every season back then.
Corona makes this list a bit random, since every country/club was affected differently.
Yeah, revenue only, no costs or debts.
And we know the sheiks pump fake sponsor money and call it revenue. It's absolutely meaningless with regards to oil clubs.
Probably something to do with the stadium no? I can't see Spurs having better commercial/sponsorship deals than Arsenal at this point
City have made a complete mockery of FFP right from the start.
I don’t believe a word of it
Revenue. so it is income. Spurs has lower wage bill than Arsenal too. I just don't understand why Levy invest so little (relatively) to improve the quality of his squad.
Even if it was true, it'd be an idiotic thing to say.
Along with the nonsense about how we can do things almost no other club could do.
Unless he meant shell £1b out and not win anything. I don't think many clubs could manage that!
When you hear talk of how we have Pogba, Cavani, Ronaldo, De Gea, Sancho, Rashford and possibly Bruno on more than Salah is on, that's when you know we've gone majorly wrong somewhere along the line.
Indeed.
You could add Martial to that list as well, I suppose.
Anyway, the point isn't precisely how much these people rake in per week - the point is that we obviously pay several players better wages than Salah, who is obviously a better player (by most standards) than anyone on our books right now.
4th is still pretty good considering our last few years and the fx rate, though concerning that Liverpool are right behind us.
Pointless list now it’s confirmed that City have inflated their income with ‘sponsorships’ and shell companies. Corrupt cnuts.
A chunk of that money isn't just from sponsorships. They won trophies with big payouts consistently and got to a CL final. Whether we're willing to accept it or not, they're doing better on and off the pitch than we currently are, and the people at our club need to wake the feck up and fast.
I'm a bit surprised that PSG isn't on the same level yet. Cooking the books championship: UAE 1 - 0 Qatar. This should be fun once Newcastle is joining the race.
the idea that Man City make more revenue than teams like Real, Barca and United is just completely absurd.With the revenue we are raking in, United won't see the back of the American owners. They will leave on their own volition only if the money stream dries up. I am resigned to having them around forever. I just wish they would act more professionally for the football side of the business.
imo Liverpool is far behind Man Utd in terms of revenue. You can not count CL income or competition winning bonus as regular and reliable income.
The money goes round as they can sponsor themselves.
Aren't they less than 10% behind going by this infographic? Liverpool finished behind United last season and only made it to the Quarters of the Champions league so its not like they were ultra successful.
10 years ago there was an enormous gap but now they don't seem to be very far behind at all.
My view is that with the current situation Man Utd, which is not much success in terms of trophy, and still has an extremely solid base of support and revenue, their income is very stable and sustainable at this level. For liverpool if their cycle finish their income may not be sustainable. That is just my opinion.
If liverpool is really only 10% behind Man Utd they would have satisfied Salah's contract demand already. Man Utd has no problem paying 500k to CR7, but seems like a big issue for Liverpool.
Why? These are teams that regularly win things
If the books were properly - and honestly balanced - at Man City and PSG, they wouldn’t be anywhere near this list.
For total turnover…yes.
For actually making money…no.
Anyone believing otherwise has truly been sportswashed.
For total turnover…yes.
For actually making money…no.
Anyone believing otherwise has truly been sportswashed.
It is not that long ago Liverpool just like Arsenal now, did not qualify for CL on a regular basis, until Klopp came along.